Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING
© by the author(s). This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.
Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 10
Zihan Song
Esri
zsong@esri.com
Robert E. Roth
University of Wisconsin–Madison
reroth@wisc.edu
Lily Houtman
The Pennsylvania State University
lhoutman@psu.edu
Timothy Prestby
The Pennsylvania State University
tprestby@psu.edu
Alicia Iverson
University of Wisconsin–Madison
aiverson3@wisc.edu
Song Gao
University of Wisconsin–Madison
gao@wisc.edu
Visual Storytelling with Maps: An Empirical Study on Story
Map Themes and Narrative Elements, Visual Storytelling
Genres and Tropes, and Individual Audience Differences
DOI: 10.14714/CP100.1759
PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE
Visual storytelling describes the communication of stories through illustrations, graphics, imagery, and video instead of,
or in addition to, oral, written, and audio formats. Compared to their popularity and wide reach, empirical research
on map-based visual stories remains limited. We work towards inlling this gap through an empirical study on data
journalism, providing the rst assessment of four emerging design considerations for visual storytelling with maps: story
map themes and their constituent narrative elements, visual storytelling genres, visual storytelling tropes, and individ-
ual audience dierences. Specically, we recruited 125 participants to an online map study, requiring them to separately
review two visual stories and respond to a series of free-response and Likert scale questions regarding their retention,
comprehension, and reaction. We followed a 2×2×2 factorial design for the visual stories, varying their themes (US pres-
idential campaign donations, US coastal sea-level rise), genres (longform infographic, dynamic slideshow), and
tropes (color highlighting, leader lines), while holding other design dimensions constant. e story theme did not inu-
ence the participants’ total retention or comprehension, indicating that a three-act narrative and its constituent elements
can be applied consistently and eectively across variable kinds of topics. Instead, genres and, to a weaker degree, tropes
inuenced total participant retention, pointing to the importance of intentional design in map-based visual storytelling.
Overall, participants performed better when the visual storytelling designs used longform infographics orscrollytell-
ing” (genres) to structure content and leader lines (tropes) to visually accent information. In contrast, the story theme
inuenced audience reaction, with participants feeling signicantly more concerned about and upset with the US presi-
dential campaign donations story compared to the US sea-level rise story. Individual audience dierences by expertise,
motivation, and prior beliefs also inuenced participant reaction. Our study signals a need for establishing a research and
education agenda on map-based visual storytelling in both cartography and data journalism.
KEYWORDS: visual storytelling; data journalism; spatial narratives; story maps; scrollytelling; narrative visualization
INTRODUCTION
H,    empirical research aimed at under-
standing how to design maps that support visual storytell-
ing. Mapping and storytelling have long been intertwined
(Denil 2017). e fourth-century Classic of Mountains and
Seas made visual the mythical story of ancient China; the
medieval Beatine Map was embedded within and rein-
forced the story of Christianity; Ogilbys Britannia atlas of
1675 presented sequenced recollections of life on the road
in an increasingly interconnected Britain. While any sto-
ryteller can use maps, graphics, sketches, etc., to advance
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 11
their narrative and enhance their story, spatialized stories
designed by cartographers traditionally were contained
within the margins of a single printed map or unfolded
through an atlas-like sequence of bound maps (Ormeling
1995). In the following, we use story to describe an account
of specic events, places, and people, and narrative to de-
scribe the structure and presentation of this content that
shapes the meaning of the story (Pearce 2008).
Arguably, both maps and stories are more accessible and
inuential today than ever due to pervasive computing,
innovations in new media, and advancing geoweb tech-
nologies (Haklay, Singleton, and Parker 2008; Sui and
Goodchild 2011; Sieber et al. 2016; Young, Hermida,
and Fulda 2018). Unsurprisingly, narrative and storytell-
ing have garnered substantial research attention at the
intersection of cartography, geography, and GIScience
(e.g., Elwood 2006; Pearce 2009; Phillips 2012; Caquard
2013) and increasingly are topics of inquiry in related, vi-
sual-centric elds such as information visualization and
visual analytics (e.g., Gershon and Page 2001; Eccles et
al. 2008; Ma et al. 2012; Kosara and Mackinlay 2013).
Professionally, the use of maps and graphics for storytell-
ing has become a dening trait of data journalism, or news
stories supplemented and even generated by analysis and
presentation of digital information (Gray, Chambers, and
Bounegru 2012). While journalists have a long history of
using data-driven maps as evidence in their news reports
(Monmonier 1989), many news organizations are explor-
ing novel narrative structures and design strategies as they
transition from a primarily print to a primarily digital me-
dium (Wallace 2016; Cairo 2017). In the following, we
adopt a broad denition of visual storytelling as the com-
munication of stories through illustrations, graphics, im-
agery, and video instead of or in addition to oral, written,
and audio formats (for a review of storytelling visualiza-
tions, see Segel and Heer 2010).
Despite both scholarly and practical advancement in the
history, application, and critique of narrative and story
in cartography and related elds, there remains relatively
limited empirical research on the intentional design of vi-
sual stories, particularly on map-based strategies and tech-
niques, and the subsequent interpretation of these designs
by their audiences. We addressed this gap through an em-
pirical study providing the rst assessment of four emerg-
ing design considerations for visual storytelling with maps:
story map themes and their constituent narrative elements,
visual storytelling genres, visual storytelling tropes, and
individual audience dierences. Specically, we asked:
1. What is the inuence of story map themes and their
constituent narrative elements on the audience’s
retention, comprehension, and reaction? Visual
stories covering dierent kinds of topics, or story
themes, still can share design similarities based
on the underlying narrative structure. A three-act
narrativedating to Aristotle’s Poetics (ca. 335
BCE) and commonly adopted in play- and screen-
writing—comprises a set-up (Act 1), a conict/
confrontation (Act 2), and a resolution (Act 3) to
give the story a beginning, middle, and ending.
Each act includes recurring narrative elements
paced to build suspense through rising action and
then tie up loose threads through falling action.
e elements of a three-act narrative can inform
the selected sequence of maps and graphics for
a visual story, enforcing continuity to produce
a linear reading of inherently non-linear, often
two-dimensional, geographic information. For
our research, we designed two map-based visual
stories on timely topics seen in US media outlets,
using a consistent three-act narrative structure and
similar constituent narrative elements: the rst
about the inuence of US presidential campaign
donations on election results and a second about
the inuence of US coastal sea-level rise on climate
change vulnerability.
2. What is the inuence of visual storytelling genres
on the audience’s retention, comprehension, and re-
action? Broadly, a genre is a category of literature,
music, or other form of artistic expression that ex-
hibits similarity in structural and stylistic elements
(see Cartwright [1999] for the rst reference to
genres related to storytelling in cartography). Our
prior work has extended Segel and Heer (2010)
to identify seven visual storytelling genres made
possible by developments in pervasive comput-
ing, new media, and geoweb technologies (Roth
2021). ese genres dier by the visual or inter-
active techniques they use to enforce continuity of
elements in the narrative sequence. In the research
we present here, we examined dierences in the
audiences retention, comprehension, and reaction
between two visual storytelling genres: longform
infographics and dynamic slideshows.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 12
3. What is the inuence of visual storytelling tropes on
the audience’s retention, comprehension, and reac-
tion? A trope is a literary or rhetorical device used
to advance a story, much like a gure of speech
(Smith 1996). We previously established seven
visual storytelling tropes that capture a range of
design techniques used not to represent infor-
mation, but to advance the narrative and develop
narrative elements (Roth 2021). Employing visual
storytelling genres that enforce a linear, three-act
narrative utilizes a rst trope—continuity—by
unifying otherwise disparate visual elements into
a logical structure (Gershon and Page 2001). In
addition, we examined design techniques used to
focus attention—a second trope rst discussed
by Gershon and Pageon important or unusu-
al information that should not be missed by the
audience. Specically, we investigated dierences
in the audience’s retention, comprehension, and
reaction between two visual attention strategies
commonly used in cartography and information
visualization (e.g., Robinson 2011; Grin and
Robinson 2015): leader lines and color highlighting.
4. What is the inuence of individual audience
dierences on their retention, comprehension, and
reaction? Visual stories are presented from a situ-
ated perspective and invite the audience to draw
from their personal backgrounds and experiences
to derive meaning from the story (Pearce 2014).
Maps and stories are persuasive and political
(Harley 1989; Cronon 1992), and commonly are
employed together for controversial, divisive topics
(Vujaković 2014; Kent 2017). Multiple personal
characteristics can inuence retention, compre-
hension, and reaction, and therefore the success of
a visual story design. We term these variable audi-
ence characteristics individual dierences, and col-
lected information on expertise, motivation, and
prior beliefs on a number of topics related to visual
storytelling to examine the inuence of individual
audience dierences on retention, comprehension,
and reaction.
We addressed these research questions through an online
map study with 125 participants recruited from Amazon
Mechanical Turk. e study required participants to sep-
arately review two visual stories and then respond to a
series of multiple choice, free response, and Likert scale
questions to assess their retention, comprehension, and
reaction. We followed a 2×2×2 factorial design for our vi-
sual story materials, varying one of our test dimensions
(themes, genres, or tropes) while holding the others con-
stant, resulting in eight unique visual story designs in total.
e remainder of this paper describes related background
work, specics about our method design, overall results,
and concluding take-homes for the intentional design of
map-based visual stories.
RELATED WORK
“S ,” “ ,”  “
” are now commonplace terms in the car-
tographic lexicon, often evoked to simultaneously describe
a mode of individual expression, a visual design meth-
od, and a technological platform. Research on “narrative
cartography” is as diverse as that on maps themselves,
with storytelling opening new intellectual spaces for cin-
ematic (e.g., Caquard and Taylor 2009; Muehlenhaus
2014), imaginative (e.g., Joliveau 2009; Caquard 2011),
Indigenous (e.g., Chapin, Lamb, and Threlkeld 2005;
Pearce and Louis 2008), literary (e.g., Moretti 2005;
Bushell 2012), multimedia (e.g., Monmonier 1992;
Cartwright 1999), and participatory (e.g., Elwood 2006;
Miller 2006) mappings. Maps can give spatial structure
to oral, written, and audio-visual forms of storytelling
(Caquard and Cartwright 2014), and often are combined
with graphics, images, videos, and text to provide a deep
account of people, places, and events (Macfarlane 2007).
We explored map-based visual storytelling through the
lens of data journalism, an area that has seen increased re-
search and professional interest in cartography, informa-
tion visualization, and related elds (for recent edited vol-
umes, see Gray, Chambers, and Bounegru 2012; Riche et
al. 2018; Engebretsen and Kennedy 2020). Data journal-
ism is an iterative process that includes collecting disparate
data, analyzing and ltering the collected data, visualiz-
ing the data, and ultimately forming a story that hinges
upon key insights within the data (Weber and Rall 2012;
Rogers 2014). us, the data journalism process is much
like the highly iterative process we follow in cartography:
both journalist and cartographer are active in shaping an
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 13
explanation of the compiled text, graphics, and images. In
other words, both maps and news stories—and the various
combinations therein—exhibit purposeful design (Roth
2021). In our research, we approached four emerging
design considerations for visual storytelling using a case
study in data journalism.
STORY MAP THEMES AND THREE-ACT
NARRATIVE ELEMENTS
First, we drew from elements of a linear, three-act narra-
tive to inform the content and sequence of maps, graph-
ics, and text for two dierent visual storytelling themes
common in data journalism. Conceptually, nearly all data
journalism lends itself to mapping, as events occur in spe-
cic geographic, historical, and social contexts. Vujakov
(2014, 15) characterizes seven “news maps” themes and
18 sub-themes receptive to mapping in data journalism,
ranging from environmental concerns to politics. Each
story theme covers a unique knowledge domain and there-
fore may represent a dierent reporting responsibility in
a news room, with the themes broad enough to apply to
many geographic locations.
If the theme informs the content of the story, a linear nar-
rative provides design guidance for structuring and pre-
senting this story content. In this way, map-based visual
stories covering very dierent themes can share similar-
ities in their design if using the same narrative structure
(see Phillips 2012 for an analysis of common narrative
structures in geography), and consideration of the con-
stituent narrative elements of this structure during story
planning oers new opportunities for visual story design.
Specically, we organized narrative elements into a three-
act structure dening the beginning, middle, and end of
each of our story themes:
1. e set-up (Act 1) introduces the setting, key
characters, and problem context. e set-up often
includes a hook, or an exciting early scene that cap-
tures the attention of the audience and encourages
them to continue reading. For visual storytelling,
a map primarily frames the setting and problem
context in the set-up act, but places depicted with-
in the map also can be treated as exemplar protag-
onist or antagonist characters.
2. e conict or confrontation (Act 2) rst intervenes
with the problem, or key issue driving the story,
and then slowly builds suspense through rising
plot points. e problem produces tension among
characters, particularly between the protagonist
and antagonist for critical juxtaposition. e char-
acters respond and evolve at each plot point. In a
cartographic context, individual plot points can be
represented as either unique symbols and annota-
tions within a single map or unique maps within
a broader sequence of graphics, images, and text.
Accordingly, representation of a single narrative
element often is described as a frame within the
overall visual story (after Pearce 2008).
3. e resolution (Act 3) culminates the narrative arc
with the dramatic climax, or nal confrontation
between characters. e resolution concludes the
story with falling action in the denouement, in
which remaining matters are explained or re-
solved. Several narrative elements can be left unre-
solved for the audience in a clihanger, stimulating
their imagination and curiosity while allowing
them to “ll in the gaps” using their own experi-
ences and predictions.
There are a number of modifications and extensions of
a three-act narrative (see Hullman et al. 2013; öny et
al. 2018), and visual storytelling often deviates from a
linear narrative to temporarily withhold information or
build suspense (Muehlenhaus 2014). However, we test-
ed two dierent visual story themes instead of two dif-
ferent narrative structures, both to simplify the factorial
study design described below and to mitigate the eect of
participant biases towards any single theme, which oth-
erwise might skew our results when testing other visual
story design considerations (i.e., genres and tropes). We
selected the case studies of US presidential campaign dona-
tions and US coastal sea-level rise to exemplify Vujaković’s
(2014) “Politics, Internal” versus “Environment and
Science” themes, two timely topics in US media outlets.
Table 1 denes the aforementioned constituent elements
of a linear, three-act narrative based on Roth (2021) and
describes their application to the two case studies used in
the online study.
VISUAL STORYTELLING GENRES
Second, we examined the influence of the visual story-
telling genre on participants’ retention, comprehension,
and reaction. Segel and Heer (2010, 1139) proposed seven
basic “genres of narrative visualization,” differentiating
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 14
Narrative
Element
Description Story 1: US Presidential Campaign Donations Story 2: US Sea-level Rise Vulnerability
Theme
The general thematic
category of the visual story
(Vujakovic 2014)
A. Politics: internal; 1. Government
D. Environment and Science; 8. Environmental problems/
impacts
Topic
The specic geographic
phenomenon or process
covered in the visual story
US presidential campaign donations US sea-level rise
Title
(Panel 1)
A condensed, engaging
headline for the visual story
The Presidency’s Price Tag: Campaign Donations and the
2012 Presidential Election
Soaking in Water: Sea-Level Rise and Vulnerable Coastal
Properties Since 2012
Summary
A brief introduction to the
visual story following a three-
act narrative structure
Purpose: This story follows two swing states—Colorado
and Ohio—to explain the impact of campaign donations
on the US presidential election results. Problem:
Differences in party campaign donations inuenced
voting results in many swing states during the 2012
Presidential Election. Resolution: Colorado and Ohio
represent different alternatives for addressing campaign
donations.
Purpose: This story follows two coastal states—New
York and North Carolina—to explain the impact of
sea-level rise on the vulnerability of coastal properties
in the US. Problem: Rising sea levels have increased the
vulnerability of properties on the East Coast of US since
2012. Resolution: New York and North Carolina represent
different alternatives for addressing sea-level rise.
Act 1: Set-up
Setting
The specic place, time, and
social context, giving the
story a geography
Space Where the story takes place US Swing States US Eastern Coastal States
Time When the story occurred The 2012 US Presidential Election The 2012 Hurricane Season
Characters
The people or places who
embody the narrative and
act-out the plot
Protagonist
(accented)
The main character in the
story
Colorado: A swing state whose voting support increased
for the Democratic candidate as Democrats gained an
advantage in campaign donations
New York: A coastal state whose vulnerability increased
as sea level rose
Antagonist
(accented)
The character in opposition
to the protagonist
Ohio: A swing state whose voting support was largely not
inuenced by an advantage in campaign donations by
either party
North Carolina: A coastal state whose vulnerability was
largely not inuenced by rising sea levels
The Hook
(Panel 1)
An exciting early scene that
captures the audiences
interest and encourages them
to continue reading
Private donations, not public discourse, shape the
outcome of the presidential election
Even small rises in sea-level dramatically increase coastal
vulnerability to storms
Problem
Context
(Panel 2)
Additional background
information needed to
interpret the story later in the
narrative sequence
Title: What Is Happening with Our Elections? It Starts
with Rising Campaign Costs. Fact: US presidential
campaign costs have increased nearly 800% in the past
40 years. Accent: Campaign costs peaked at $1.74
billion in the 2008 presidential election. Graph: Y value:
Presidential Election Costs ($ Billion); X value: Year.
Title: What is Happening with Our Coasts? It Starts with
Rising Temperatures. Fact: US average temperatures
have increased almost 3 °F in the past 40 years. Accent:
US average temperatures peaked at 54.3 °F in 2015.
Graph: Y value: Average Temperature (°F); X value:
Year.
Problem
Context
(Panel 3)
Additional background
information needed to
interpret the story later in the
narrative sequence
Title: Why Do Costs Matter? More than 50% of
Campaign Funds were from Donations in 2012.
Colorado: The average person in Colorado donated
$3.30 during the 2012 presidential election. Ohio: The
average person in Ohio donated only $1.50 during the
2012 presidential election. Legend: title: Presidential
Campaign Donations; description: Average donations per
person ($), 2012 presidential election.
Title: Why Do Coasts Matter? More than 50% of US
Citizens Lived in Coastal Areas by 2012. New York:
3,081 people live in an average square mile of New
York coasts. North Carolina: Only 73 people live in an
average square mile of North Carolina coasts. Legend:
title: Coastal Population Density; description: Average
people per square mile of coastal area, 2012.
Table 1. Elements of a Three-act Narrative. A linear, three-act narrative comprises a set-up (Act 1), conict/confrontation (Act 2), and
resolution (Act 3). This table describes how we applied the constituent elements of a linear, three-act narrative to the pair of visual stories
used in this study. Continued on the next page.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 15
each genre by the number and order of frames within the
story: magazine style, annotated chart, partitioned post-
er, ow chart, comic strip, slide show, and lm/video/an-
imation. While foundational, the original Segel and Heer
taxonomy drew primarily upon printed news maps and
passive television news reporting, thus preceding many
emerging design practices made possible by pervasive
computing, new media, and geoweb technologies (Kosara
and Mackinlay 2013). Further, the number of frames
is less relevant with these emerging technologies, where
page space is unlimited. In response, we previously pro-
posed a revised taxonomy of visual storytelling genres
based only on the visual or interactive technique used to
enforce continuity of elements in the narrative sequence:
Act 2: Conict/Confrontation
Problem/
Catalyst
(Panel 4)
The central confrontation,
obstacle, or setback driving
the story
Title: So What? Increasing Donations Pose A Problem…
Fact: The Democrat advantage in campaign donations
reached $253 million for the 2012 presidential election.
Accent: Democrats received $51 million more donations
than Republicans in September, the largest donations
advantage during the 2012 president election. Graph:
Y value: Cumulative Donation Gap ($ Million); X value:
Month
Title: So What? Rising Sea Levels Pose a Problem…
Fact: The US average sea levels in 2012 reached 47.8
millimeters above the 2002 average. Accent: Global
sea levels rose 8.4 millimeters in 2012, the largest sea-
level rise from 2002-2012. Graph: Y value: Cumulative
Sea Level Change (Millimeters); X value: Year.
Tension
(Panel 5)
The impact of the problem
on the protagonist versus the
antagonist
Title: …Particularly for Swing States. Colorado:
Democrats increased their support by 6.5% in the swing
state of Colorado. Ohio: Democrats only increased their
support by 0.7% in the swing state of Ohio. Legend:
title: Increase in Voting Lead; description: Change in
Democratic lead (% total), July 2012 poll to Nov 2012
election.
Title: Particularly for States on the East Coast. New
York: The average value of vulnerable properties
in coastal areas is $24,800 in New York. North
Carolina: The average value of vulnerable properties in
coastal areas is only $7,730 in North Carolina. Legend:
title: Property Vulnerability; description: Average value of
vulnerable coastal properties ($), 2012
Plot Points
(Panel 6)
One in a sequence of events
motivated by the problem
that impacts the characters
(Cause)
Title: A Deeper Look: Democrats Gained their Largest
Donation Advantage in Major Cities. Fact: Democrats
drew 140% more urban-based donations per person in
Colorado than Ohio, largely attributed to the progressive
Denver metro area. Accent: The Democrats gained an
advantage of $4,400,000 in Denver, the highest urban
lead in swing states; Legend: title: Donation Gap
description: Democrat advantage in campaign donations
($), 2012
Title: A Deeper Look: Sea Levels Rose the Most in Major
Stations. Fact: Sea-level rose 50% more in urban-centers
in New York compared to North Carolina, particularly
due to the dense infrastructure in New York City and
Long Island. Accent: Sea-level annual rate in Bergen
Point is 4.4 millimeters, the highest rate among stations
in coastal states. Legend: title: Average Sea-Level Rise
description: Average annual sea-level rise (millimeters/
year), 1992–2012.
Act 3: Resolution
Climax
(Panel 7)
The nal plot point bringing
characters together to face
their tension and consider
competing solutions (Effect)
Title: As a Result, Campaign Donations Have a Different
Inuence on Election Results in Swing States like Colorado
versus Ohio. Colorado: Every $100 advantage for the
Democrats bought 7.5 votes in Colorado. Ohio: Every
$100 advantage for the Democrats bought only 2.8 votes
in Ohio.
Title: As a Result, Sea-level Rise Has a Different Impact
on Vulnerability in Coastal States like New York versus
North Carolina. New York: Every inch in sea-level
rise exposes $3,900 of property in New York. North
Carolina: Every inch in sea-level rise only exposes
$1,400 of property in North Carolina.
Resolution
& Denoue-
ment
(Panel 8)
Falling action in which all
remaining matters with
the setting, characters,
and problem context are
explained or resolved
Title: Whats Next? Colorado and Ohio Represent
Different Alternatives for Addressing Campaign
Donations. Colorado: Colorado has imposed new
regulations to limit campaign funding since the 2012
presidential election. Ohio: At the same time, Ohio has
failed to act on campaign funding.
Title: What’s Next? New York and North Carolina
Represent Different Alternatives for Addressing Sea-level
Rise. New York: New York has invested considerable
public funds to prevent sea-level rise related crises.
North Carolina: At the same time, North Carolina has
failed to act on sea-level rise.
Cliffhanger
(Panel 9)
The dramatic ending,
leaving open strands for the
audience to ponder
Title: What Do You Think We Should Do As a Nation?
Colorado: The Democrats are predicted to make
only a 2.3% gain in Colorado in the 2020 presidential
election if campaign funding remains consistent from
2016. Ohio: The Republicans are predicted to make a
whopping 12.5% gain in Ohio in the 2020 presidential
election if campaign funding remains consistent from the
2016. Legend: title: Voting Results Predictions, 2020
Presidential Election; description: Predicted Republican
voting lead; Predicted Democratic voting lead
Title: What Do You Think We Should Do as a Nation?
New York: The value of vulnerable properties per
person in New York is predicted to increase to $290 by
2020 if sea levels continue to increase at a consistent
rate. North Carolina: The value of vulnerable
properties per person in North Carolina is predicted to
increase a surprising $325 by 2020 if sea levels continue
to increase at a consistent rate. Legend: title: Predicted
Property Vulnerability; description: Increased value
of vulnerable coastal properties per person ($), 2020
Prediction
Table 1 (continued). Elements of a Three-act Narrative. A linear, three-act narrative comprises a set-up (Act 1), conict/confrontation (Act
2), and resolution (Act 3). This table describes how we applied the constituent elements of a linear, three-act narrative to the pair of visual
stories used in this study.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 16
static visual stories (encapsulating most of the Segel and
Heer taxonomy), longform infographics, dynamic slide-
shows (from Segel and Heer), narrated animations (from
Segel and Heer), multimedia visual experiences, person-
alized story maps, and compilations (Roth 2021; Table 2).
We also imagine the ability to mash up these genres, com-
bining dierent visual or interactive techniques for enforc-
ing continuity within a single visual story.
Of these possible genres, we narrowed our focus for this
research to longform infographics and dynamic slide-
shows. Longform infographics enforce continuity through
vertical reading and browser scrolling, with the genre often
described as “scrollytelling” by data journalists (Stolper
et al. 2016, 8; citing Bostock 2014). In contrast, dynam-
ic slideshows enforce continuity by advancement through
a series of visual panels or frames of consistent size and
format, producing a discrete, typically horizontal scroll
versus the continuous vertical scroll of longform info-
graphics; this discrete sequencing of content sometimes is
described as “pagination” when used as a web design strat-
egy (Wieczorek et al. 2014, 310). We selected these two
genres for our initial investigation in order to contrast the
slideshow presentations common across academia, gov-
ernment, and industry (Kosara and Mackinlay 2013) with
the longform infographic or “scrollytelling” approaches
now common in news media, as this structural dierence
in the method for enforcing continuity between the two
genres (and across all genres) potentially influences the
audiences’ retention, comprehension, and reaction. For
instance, eye-tracking studies have shown that scrollable
web content promotes visual skimming (Nielsen 2006),
a potential disadvantage of longform infographics com-
pared to dynamic slideshows. In contrast, dynamic slide-
shows explicitly dose information into less complex slides
to reduce skimming, an advantage previously found to aid
retention in text presentations (Wieczorek et al. 2014).
However, the scrolling in longform infographics en-
ables continuous, audience-driven pacing (Harrower and
Sheesley 2005), and thus makes the user more active in
the experience. In contrast, dynamic slideshows require
discrete advancement of slides at a potentially monotonous
pace that is designer-driven, which may be exacerbated by
lags from reloading wrapper page content for each slide.
We provide additional discussion on the relative advantag-
es and limitations of dierent visual storytelling genres in
Roth (2021).
VISUAL STORYTELLING TROPES
ird, we considered new visual design techniquesde-
scribed as tropes—used not to represent information, but
rather to enhance the narrative. Our use of tropes syn-
thesized disparate literature on narrative cartography and
visualization. For instance, Gershon and Page (2001, 34)
described “story-like visual presentation,” listing story-
telling concepts like conflict and ambiguity resolution,
continuity, eective redundancy, lling gaps, increasing
Genre Linearity Denition
Static Visual Story Linearity is enforced through partitioning of the layout into frames and clarifying annotation.
Longform Infographic Linearity is enforced through vertical reading and browser scrolling.
Dynamic Slideshow Linearity is enforced by advancement through a series of slides.
Narrated Animation Linearity is enforced by the progression of digital display time.
Multimedia Visual Experience Linearity is enforced by anchor tags and hyperlinking.
Personalized Story Map Linearity is enforced by the order that an individual contributes content to the map.
Visual Story Compilation Linearity is enforced by unfolding events in near real-time or major updates to the design.
Table 2. Visual Storytelling Genres. Visual storytelling genres are dened by the visual or interactive technique used to enforce linearity of
elements in the narrative sequence. This table describes the taxonomy of visual storytelling genres introduced by Roth (2021), expanded
from Segel and Heer (2010). We examined the longform infographic and dynamic slideshow genres in this study.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 17
attention, and setting the mood.
Similarly, Pearce (2009, 4) com-
bined “narrative techniques” like
ambiguity, closure, focalization,
scale, and voice to express “qual-
ities of place: intimacy, identity,
and connection with the read-
er.” Elsewhere, such tropes are
described collectively as story-
telling aordances (Kosara and
Mackinlay 2013), devices (Segel
and Heer 2010), or figures
(Cattoor and Perkins 2014). As
described in our prior work, we
organized these existing con-
cepts and recommendations into
seven design tropes for visual
storytelling: continuity (central
to the delineation of the dif-
ferent genres described above),
mood, dosing, attention, re-
dundancy, metaphor, and voice
(Roth 2021; Table 3). Each
trope then has an associated set
of design techniques that can be
employed for visual storytelling.
In addition to dierences in continuity by genre, we ex-
amined dierent methods for focusing attention on im-
portant or unusual information in the story that should
not be missed (Gershon and Page 2001). Attention as a
trope describes a range of design solutions that produce
an “Isolation Eect,” making one item stand out over oth-
ers in a visual scene (Lidwell, Holden, and Butler 2010,
254). Commonly used techniques for focusing attention
in cartography and visualization include highlighting fea-
tures through the visual variables (e.g., Robinson 2011);
applying annotations such as leader lines, flow arrows,
appended geometric frames, opacity masks, numbering,
call-outs, and labels (e.g., Pearce 2008); and creating dy-
namic changes through blinking/flickering, panning/
zooming, and focus+context visualizations (e.g., Weber
Reuschel, Piatti, and Hurni 2014). We provided addi-
tional discussion of these focusing attention techniques in
Roth (2021) using the catch-all term visual accenting. In
the presented study, we specically examined the dier-
ences in attention between leader lines and color highlight-
ing within a single representation, similar to Grin and
Robinsons (2015) investigation into the use of these two
visual accenting techniques for focusing attention between
two coordinated representations. Notably, Griffin and
Robinson found leader lines to perform equally well as the
more common color highlighting for focusing attention
between coordinated views. We held all other visual story-
telling tropes constant across tested materials.
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Finally, we addressed the role of individual differences
among the audience on the eectiveness of visual story-
telling. Just like maps, stories and their meanings are not
xed or objective truths, but rather are shaped by the situ-
ated backgrounds and experiences of both storyteller and
audience (after Haraway 1991; Rose 1997). While our
contribution in this paper is to the design of map-based
visual stories, and new ways that a cartographer or data
journalist can shape the narrative, we recognize that the
same design will conjure different understandings and
evoke dierent responses from dierent people in dier-
ent places (Pearce 2014). An advantage to taking a nar-
rative approach to cartography is that it enables the em-
brace of pluralism—a data feminism principle—allowing
designers to be more transparent in their positionality
Table 3. Visual Storytelling Tropes. Visual storytelling tropes are design techniques used
not to represent information, but rather to enhance the narrative. This table summarizes
emerging tropes identied by Roth (2021). Two visual accenting solutions for focusing
attention were examined in this study: color highlighting and leader lines, following Grifn
and Robinson (2015).
Trope Denition
Continuity Unify otherwise disparate visual elements into a logical structure.
Mood Set a visual tone congruent with the narrative and its elements.
Dosing
Reduce overall complexity of story content into incremental chunks of
information.
Attention
Emphasize important or unusual information that cannot be missed in
the story.
Redundancy Repeat important or unusual information to develop story themes.
Metaphor
Bring together seemingly unrelated concepts in a single frame to
facilitate understanding of complex narrative elements.
Voice
Embed situated experiences, opinions, and values into the visual story
to clarify meaning.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 18
toward the story theme, while also inviting the audience
to form multiple, equally-valid story meanings (adapted
from D’Ignazio and Klein 2020). Considering the individ-
ual audience dierences that inuence visual storytelling
can help cartographers and data journalists make more in-
formed choices about their designs (Fish 2020b).
To this end, we drew upon work on mapping context and
individual dierences in cartography and visualization (see
Grin et al. 2017 for a comprehensive review and syn-
thesis). Expanding upon our prior work (Roth 2009), we
rst collected several measures of our participants’ exper-
tise—including their education, training, familiarity, and
interest—regarding topics related to map-based visual
storytelling. ese included their experience with dier-
ent news media (print and online), maps and information
graphics, computing technology and the internet, and rel-
evant news story themes.
We then collected measures of motivation regarding the
same topics, an individual difference we have found to
be as important as expertise for the success of web maps
(Roth and Harrower 2008).
Finally, we assessed prior beliefs developed from past ex-
perience with topics related to the visual stories that may
bias a reader in favor for or against a contentious posi-
tion. Regarding map-based visual stories, prior beliefs
may persist even in the face of evidence that invalidates
them (Cohen 2012). Both tested themes followed Phillips
(2012) cause and eect three-act narrative structure, and
we embedded a subtle conservative lean in the US presi-
dential campaign donations visual story and a subtle liberal
lean in the US coastal sea-level rise visual story to balance
prior beliefs for the other visual story design consider-
ations. We did not assess the inuence of other sociode-
mographic dierences, given the sensitivity of the visual
story themes and the focused goals of the research.
METHODS
PARTICIPANTS
O  - participants completed
an online map study assessing their retention, compre-
hension, and reaction across dierent map-based visual
story designs. We recruited participants from Amazon
Mechanical Turk in March 2017—after rst conducting a
pilot survey with four participants in a controlled environ-
ment in the University of Wisconsin Cartography Lab to
capture potential issues with the survey design. e pilot
study resulted in small text and styling changes, but no
major changes to the study design.
Recruitment using Mechanical Turk has both advantag-
es and limitations for our study (see Hauser, Paolacci,
and Chandler 2019 for expanded discussion). We chose
Mechanical Turk over alternatives, such as university stu-
dent recruitment pools, to capture greater demographic,
geographic, and political diversity among participants,
which was important for our ability to assess the inuence
of individual differences and, specifically, prior beliefs,
on participants’ retention, comprehension, and reaction.
However, recruitment with Mechanical Turk restricted
us from purposefully sampling by individual dierences
without the risk of dramatically oversampling one group;
accordingly the sample variability in individual dierenc-
es may have an inuence on the study results. Additional
limitations include variable participant attention and expe-
rience with research studies, which we mitigated partially
through questions on individual dierences and balanced
experimental procedure. Finally, Mechanical Turk has
prompted new ethical considerations for human subjects
research regarding the exploitation of labor and associated
expected quality of experimental results (DIgnazio and
Klein 2020). We designed the survey to take 30 minutes
to complete, and participants received $4 USD for com-
pensation, a rate that exceeded the Wisconsin minimum
wage at the time of the study ($7.25/hr USD). Participants
completed the survey with a median time of 30.71 and av-
erage of 34.64 minutes.
Of the 125 participants in our sample, 71 identified as
male and 54 as female, with zero responses to non-binary
categories, and an average age of 35 years old. Nineteen
participants did not attend college, 43 attended some col-
lege or were attending college, 55 completed an under-
graduate degree, six completed a graduate degree, and two
reported “Other.
Online participants completed the survey on their own
computing devices and were instructed to use non-mobile
devices. Sixty-three participants completed the survey on
a laptop computer and 62 on a desktop computer. Because
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 19
Figure 1. Participant characteristics.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 20
all evaluated map-based visu-
al stories dealt with US-based
issues (see below), we limited
participation to the US gener-
al public. Figure 1 provides an
overview of participant char-
acteristics; the Supplemental
Materials include an additional
breakdown of the sample by in-
dividual differences by experi-
mental condition.
MATERIALS
e online map study followed a
2×2×2 factorial design (Montello
and Sutton 2012):
Factor 1: emes.
Conditions consisted of
stories on US presidential
campaign donations and US
sea-level rise, exemplifying
Vujakovs (2014) “Politics,
Internal” and “Environment and Science” themes.
Both conditions followed Phillips (2012) cause and
eect three-act narrative structure and used real
data for their contents, with US presidential campaign
donations receiving a subtle conservative lean in the
cause and eect structure and US sea-level rise a subtle
liberal lean to balance eects from prior beliefs.
Factor 2: Genres. Conditions consisted of longform
infographics and dynamic slideshows. We rst dosed
story content for both conditions into nine-frame
storyboards (three frames per act)—with each frame
representing a dierent narrative element—and then
assembled the frames using the continuity technique
dening the given genre (continuous scrolling versus
discrete slide advancement, respectively) to promote
information equivalency between conditions. We
loaded all nine frames onto the survey webpage for
the longform infographics condition, although frames
were spaced so that only one was visible at a time
while scrolling up to a 1080p resolution screen in
order to mimic “lazy loading” of content that was
conventional in web design at the time of the study.
In contrast, only one frame was loaded into the
webpage at a time for the dynamic slideshow condition,
again following convention at the time of the study of
AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) or sepa-
rate webpages to load content on demand. e result
was an intentional delineation in the experience be-
tween continuous and discrete scrolling. Participants
could return to prior frames in both genres (i.e.,
scroll-up, previous slide), but were prevented from
returning to the visual stories after advancing past the
last frame.
Factor 3: Tropes. Conditions consisted of two common
design solutions for focusing attention, leader lines and
color highlighting. We used black for color highlighting,
as black was not used for symbolization and therefore
could be applied consistently across the graphics. e
use of black also avoided any potential issues with
color vision deciency in the participant sample.
For design consistency, leader lines also used black
strokes. e attention solutions were applied to the
protagonist and antagonist in each design, leading to
the introduction of two complementary place-based
characters for each story.
The 2×2×2 factorial design resulted in construction of
eight unique stories (Table 4). e overall aesthetic style
Story Theme (Factor 1) Genre (Factor 2) Trope (Factor 3)
Story 1 US sea-level rise Longform Infographic Color highlighting
Story 2
US presidential
campaign donations
Longform Infographic Leader lines
Story 3
US presidential
campaign donations
Longform Infographic Color highlighting
Story 4 US sea-level rise Longform Infographic Leader lines
Story 5
US presidential
campaign donations
Dynamic Slideshow Leader lines
Story 6 US sea-level rise Dynamic Slideshow Color highlighting
Story 7 US sea-level rise Dynamic Slideshow Leader lines
Story 8
US presidential
campaign donations
Dynamic Slideshow Color highlighting
Table 4. Factorial Design. The study followed a 2×2×2 factorial design, resulting in eight
unique visual stories.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 21
and layout (i.e., mood), the
amount and complexity of
story content (i.e., dosing),
and the visualization de-
signs remained consistent
for comparability. Figure
2 provides an overview of
the two, nine-frame visual
stories and Figure 3 pro-
vides a preview of the sur-
vey interface for advancing
both genres. All tested ma-
terials are included in the
Supplemental Materials.
PROCEDURE
e online map study began
with an overview of project
purpose and goals. After
obtaining consent, partici-
pants completed a training
block to combat learning
effects. The training block
contained the opening three
frames of a third example
visual story on US book-
store sales that followed the
same design rules of other
materials and included sim-
ilar questions as the other
experimental blocks (also
included in Supplemental
Materials). Participants
were allotted as much time
as needed to review the
training block before pro-
gressing to the experimental
blocks.
Participants then complet-
ed two experimental blocks
covering the US presidential
campaign donations and US
sea-level rise themes (Table
5). We assigned Factors
1 (themes) and 3 (tropes)
within-subjects, with as-
signment balanced so that
Figure 2. Visual Story Design. Both visual story themes were designed as a nine-panel sequence—
with each panel representing a different narrative element (Table 1)—that could be presented as
either a longform infographic or dynamic slideshow. Top: The US presidential campaign donations
theme using leader lines. Bottom: The US sea level rise theme using color highlighting. High
resolution versions of all tested materials are available as supplemental materials.
1
1
4
4
7
7
2
2
5
5
8
8
3
3
6
6
9
9
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 22
each possible combination of themes and tropes was
viewed by approximately one quarter of the study partici-
pants. We assigned Factor 2 (genres) between-subjects so
that participants viewed just one linear structure during
the survey, limiting confusion over layout and interface
changes to the survey instrument between the two blocks.
Participants responded to questions on separate survey
pages after reviewing the visual story in full. Common
measures of map design effectiveness include accuracy/
correctness, response time, and completeness (Sweeney,
Maguire, and Shackel 1993). However, Kosara and
Mackinlay (2013) and Figueiras (2014) argue that the
eectiveness of visual stories should instead be based on
engagement and interest when reading the story, the abil-
ity to remember key points in the story, and the ability to
make better informed decisions after reading the story.
Finally, we have advocated in prior work to evaluate visu-
al stories as much on their “eectiveness” as on how they
make the audience feel about the depicted geographies
(Roth 2021). Accordingly, participants responded to three
kinds of questions about the story within each block, with
each set of questions its own survey page:
1. Retention: e retention page included 12 multiple
choice questions built from benchmark mapping
tasks (Roth 2013). We included these questions to
supply baseline “accuracy” or “correctness” metrics
common in empirical research on map design out-
side of visual storytelling (after Sweeney, Maguire,
and Shackel 1993). e questions varied on the
level of predicted diculty: three ordinal com-
pare tasks (easiest), three ordinal rank tasks, and
six numerical identify tasks (hardest). All tasks
were phrased at an elementary map reading level
to focus attention onto specic narrative elements
in the visual story (Andrienko, Andrienko, and
Gatalsky 2003). e twelve questions were ran-
domized to avoid learning eects between blocks.
We placed the retention questions at the end of
the experimental block to reduce short-term recall,
with retention questions following the compre-
hension and reaction questions.
2. Comprehension: Participants summarized the
content of the story through a single, open-ended
question, which we added to capture qualitative
Figure 3. Survey Design. The survey design used two different
interactive techniques to advance frames based on the examined
genre. Top: The longform infographic condition loaded all frames
into the webpage and used browser scrolling by mouse wheel
or side scroll bar to advance frames, spaced to show only one
frame at a time. Bottom: The dynamic slideshow condition loaded
one frame at a time and used bottom “Back” and “Next” buttons
to advance frames.
Table 5. Group Assignment. Each participant reviewed both
visual story themes, with the visual stories presented in the same
genre but using different trope solutions.
Group
Sample Size
(n=125 total)
First
Viewed
Second
Viewed
Group I 33 Story 1 Story 2
Group II 30 Story 3 Story 4
Group III 31 Story 5 Story 6
Group IV 31 Story 7 Story 8
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 23
and potentially meaningful engagement and
interest with the visual story (after Kosara and
Mackinlay 2013; Figueiras 2014). We instructed
participants to be as comprehensive as possible and
to use their own words when phrasing their sum-
mary. We then coded the open-ended respons-
es following tenets of qualitative data analysis
(Caudle 2004), with codes based on the narrative
elements shaping the visual stories: setting (space,
time), characters (protagonist, antagonist), prob-
lem, cause, eect/resolution, and clihanger, as
well as a nal code to capture any mistakes in
comprehension (e.g., see Table 1 for example state-
ments that would be coded as “comprehended”).
us, the coding scheme measured whether pur-
poseful treatment of these narrative elements in
the visual story design resulted in reader compre-
hension. e codes were binary based on presence
or absence within the participant open-ended
response (i.e., did the participant comprehend the
narrative element correctly in their response). e
rst 10% of the comprehension responses were
coded by two, independent coders to hone code
denitions and clarify ambiguity in the coding
scheme.
3. Reaction: Participants responded to a series of
seven-point Likert scales to capture how they felt
about the visual stories and their depicted plac-
es and people (after Roth 2021). Reaction scales
included participant interests in and beliefs about
the visual story. Participants also self-reported
their core aect in reaction to the visual story,
including audience arousal (activated vs. deactivat-
ed) and hedonic valence (pleasant vs. unpleasant;
Grin and McQuoid 2012).
Participants completed this set of questions for both ex-
perimental blocks, resulting in responses to 250 unique
blocks through the sample of 125 participants.
Participants concluded the study with an exit survey to
characterize individual dierences that might inuence
retention, comprehension, and reaction. e exit survey
included questions on expertise, motivation, and prior be-
liefs using ordinal Likert scales. e complete online map
study protocol is available in the Supplemental Materials.
ANALYSIS
Each factor (themes, genres, tropes) in the study design
served as an independent variable, with responses to reten-
tion, comprehension, and reaction serving as dependent
variables, respectively, and individual dierences as inter-
action eects. We applied factorial ANOVA to assess the
inuence of the three factors on retention, comprehension,
and reaction, as well as the pairwise interaction eects be-
tween factors to establish independence. We used factori-
al ANOVA instead of individual t-tests to mitigate alpha
accumulation (Type I error) across a large number of hy-
pothesis tests. We prepared a separate factorial ANOVA
model for each unique retention (Table 6), comprehen-
sion (Table 7), and reaction (Table 8) measure, resulting
in 23 total factorial ANOVA models. Figures 4, 5, and 6
visually illustrate dierences by conditions for the reten-
tion, comprehension, and reaction measures, respectively,
marking dierences by themes, genres, or tropes identied
as signicant through factorial ANOVA.
We then used multiple linear regression (MLR) models to
assess the inuence of individual dierences on retention
and comprehension (Table 9). We used MLR over a series
of Spearman rank correlationsagain to mitigate alpha ac-
cumulation. MLR quanties the relationship of predictors
to a single response variable in the form of B weight coe-
cients (Nathans, Oswald, and Nimon 2012). We chose the
B weight, which is unstandardized, to assess variable im-
portance because each predictor variable was measured in
the same units (Allen 2017). A coecient of zero indicates
the predictor has no influence on the response variable
while a positive/negative coecient indicates that, with all
other variables held constant, for every increase of one unit
in the predictor, the response variable increases/decreas-
es on average the value by of the coecient respectively.
Since some questions capturing individual differences
were specic to one story over the other, we ran three dif-
ferent MLR models for comprehension and retention: re-
sponses to the US presidential campaign donations condition
alone, the US sea-level rise condition alone, and pooled re-
sponses together for individual dierences relevant to both
conditions.
We used a version of ordinal linear regression (OLR)
known as the proportional odds model (POM) to analyze
the reaction Likert scales (Brant 1990; Table 10). POM is
a non-parametric method that quanties the proportional
odds ratio (θ) between predictor variables and the response
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 24
variable (McCullagh 1980). e range of the odds ratio is
from 0 to positive innity, with every one-point increase
in the Likert scale predictor having x times (odds ratio)
the odds of the response variable being a unit higher. For
instance, a one unit increase in a predictor with an odds
ratio of 1.4 increases the odds of the response variable
being one unit higher by 40%. We ran eight models test-
ing the inuence of individual dierences on each of the
eight reaction Likert scales.
We also tested for multicollinearity among measures of
individual differences to reduce the variance/standard
error in the regression coecient estimates. We calculat-
ed the variance inuence factors (VIFs) for all individual
dierences and removed variables with VIFs over 4 to re-
duce multicollinearity, as VIF=4 means that the standard
error for the coecient of that predictor variable is 2 times
(i.e., the square root of 4) larger than if that predictor vari-
able had 0 correlation with the other predictor variables
(Lavery et al. 2019). We removed seven of the collected
individual dierence measures as a result, which are high-
lighted in yellow in the results tables.
In the following discussion, we present retention results
rst, as comprehension and reaction enrich the quantita-
tive analysis on retention. We present interaction eects
from individual dierences last.
Table 6. Participant Retention Results. The table shows descriptive statistics (top) and factorial ANOVA (bottom) for retention. The table
includes main effects by factor (theme, genre, and trope) as well as interaction effects between factors. The table includes four separate
factorial ANOVA models on retention for compare (ordinal), rank (ordinal), identify (numerical), and total retention. Color indicates
signicance: p < 0.10 , p < 0.05 , p < 0.01 , p < 0.001.
Factor /
Interactions
Compare (Ordinal) Rank (Ordinal) Identify (Numerical) Total Retention
Descriptive Statistics n Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean sd
Total 3000 81.9% 24.5% 71.7% 2 7. 4 % 66.2% 26.8% 71.4% 20.7%
US presidential
campaign donations
1500 84.3% 27. 0 % 63.5% 27. 6% 65.3% 27.2% 69.6% 21.6%
US sea-level rise 1500 79.5% 21.5% 80.0% 24.7% 67.1% 26.5% 73.3% 19.6%
Longform
infographics
1512 84.9% 21.3% 70.9% 2 7. 6 % 71.0% 24.4% 74. 5% 18.2%
Dynamic slideshows 1488 78.8% 2 7. 0 % 72.6% 27.2% 61.3% 28.3% 68.3% 22.6%
Leader lines 1500 84.0% 24.5% 73.3% 2 7. 4 % 69.2% 26.8% 73.8% 20.7%
Color highlighting 1500 79.7% 25.4% 70.1% 2 7. 4% 63.2% 27.1% 69.1% 20.9%
Factorial ANOVA df
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Theme 1 1.30 2.44 0.12 15.38 25.12 0.00 0.68 0.27 0.60 12.10 2.03 0.16
Genre 1 2.13 4.01 0.05 0.16 0.26 0.61 21.35 8.52 0.00 33.75 5.67 0.02
Trope 1 0.97 1.83 0.18 0.73 1.19 0.28 8.22 3.28 0.07 20.93 3.51 0.06
Theme : Genre 1 0.05 0.09 0.76 0.77 1.25 0.26 1.30 0.52 0.47 0.13 0.02 0.88
Theme : Trope 1 0.21 0.40 0.53 2.46 4.01 0.05 3. 74 1.49 0.22 14.72 2.47 0.12
Genre : Trope 1 0.18 0.33 0.57 0.02 0.03 0.85 0.63 0.25 0.62 0.13 0.02 0.88
Residuals 243 0.53 0.61 2.51 5.96
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 25
Table 7. Participant Comprehension Results (in two parts). The table shows descriptive statistics (top half of each part) and factorial
ANOVA (bottom half) for comprehension. The table includes main effects by factor (theme, genre, and trope) as well as interaction effects
between factors. The table includes nine separate factorial ANOVA models on comprehension for each of the nine evaluated narrative
elements and two additional models for total comprehension across all elements and mistakes in comprehension. Color indicates
signicance: p < 0.10 , p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001.
Factor /
Interactions
Space Time Protagonist Antagonist Problem
Descriptive n mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd
Total 250 26.5% 44.2% 18.0% 38.5% 59.6% 49.2% 52.4% 50.0% 96.0% 19.6%
US presidential
campaign donations
125 35.2% 48.0% 24.0% 42.9% 52.0% 50.2% 48.8% 50.2% 96.0% 19. 7%
US sea-level rise 125 17. 7 % 38.4% 12.0% 32.6% 6 7. 2 % 4 7.1% 56.0% 49.8% 96.0% 19.7 %
Longform
infographics
126 32.5% 4 7. 0 % 18.3% 38.8% 60.3% 49.1% 50.8% 50.2% 9 9.2% 8.9%
Dynamic slideshows 124 20.3% 40.4% 17. 7 % 38.4% 58.9% 49.4% 54.0% 50.0% 92.7% 26.0%
Leader lines 125 24.0% 42.9% 19.2% 39.5% 60.8% 49.0% 52.0% 50.2% 95.2% 21.5%
Color highlighting 125 29.0% 45.6% 16.8% 37. 5 % 58.4% 49.5% 52.8% 50.1% 96.8% 17. 7 %
Factorial ANOVA df
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Theme 1 1.94 10.49 0.00 0.90 6.23 0.01 1.44 6.02 0.01 0.32 1.27 0.26 0.00 0.00 1.00
Genre 1 0.96 5.19 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.92 0.01 0.06 0.82 0.07 0.26 0.61 0.26 6.82 0.01
Trope 1 0.17 0.92 0.34 0.03 0.19 0.66 0.05 0.20 0.66 0.00 0.01 0.92 0.02 0.42 0.52
Theme : Genre 1 0.58 3.13 0.08 0.47 3.24 0.07 0.20 0.83 0.36 0.00 0.02 0.89 0.02 0.40 0.53
Theme : Trope 1 0.06 0.34 0.56 0.26 1.82 0.18 0.05 0.19 0.66 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.99
Genre : Trope 1 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.13 0.88 0.35 0.18 0. 76 0.38 0.01 0.02 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.98
Residuals 243 0.18 0.14 0.24 0.26 0.04
Factor /
Interactions
Tension Cause Effect Cliffhanger Total Mistakes
Descriptive n mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd
Total 250 69.2% 46.3% 32.4% 46.9% 50.8% 50.1% 26.8% 44.4% 48.0% 22.9% 12.4% 33.0%
US Presidential
campaign donations
125 71.2% 45.5% 20.8% 40.8% 44.0% 49.8% 25.6% 43.8% 46.4% 22.7% 16.0% 36.8%
US sea-level rise 125 6 7. 2 % 4 7.1% 44.0% 49.8% 5 7. 6 % 49.6% 28.0% 45.1% 49.6% 23.0% 8.8% 28.4%
Longform
infographics
126 69.8% 46.1% 35.7% 48.1% 50.8% 50.2% 2 7. 0 % 44.6% 49.4% 21.7% 11.1% 31.6%
Dynamic slideshows 124 68.5% 46.6% 29.0% 45.6% 50.8% 50.2% 26.6% 44.4% 46.6% 24.0% 13.7% 34.5%
Leader lines 125 73.6% 44.3% 35.2% 48.0% 50.4% 50.2% 25.6% 43.8% 48.4% 23.2% 13.6% 34.4%
Color highlighting 125 64.8% 48.0% 29.6% 45.8% 51.2% 50.2% 28.0% 45.1% 4 7. 6 % 22.6% 11. 2% 31.6%
Factorial ANOVA df
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Theme 1 0.10 0.46 0.50 3.36 16.36 0.00 1.16 4.63 0.03 0.04 0.18 0.67 5.18 1.21 0.27 0.32 2.98 0.09
Genre 1 0.01 0.05 0.83 0.28 1.36 0.25 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.95 3.93 0.92 0.34 0.04 0.39 0.53
Trope 1 0.47 2.19 0.14 0.24 1.15 0.28 0.00 0.01 0.94 0.03 0.17 0.68 0.47 0.11 0.74 0.03 0.29 0.59
Theme:Genre 1 0.11 0.52 0.47 0.32 1.56 0.21 0.11 0.43 0.51 0.10 0.48 0.49 0.25 0.06 0.81 0.03 0.30 0.58
Theme:Trope 1 0 .11 0.50 0.48 0.34 1.63 0.20 0.57 2.29 0.13 0.12 0.58 0.45 0.09 0.02 0.89 0.08 0.69 0.41
Genre:Trope 1 0.00 0.02 0.90 0.25 1.20 0.27 0.03 0.12 0.73 0.31 1.55 0.21 0.68 0.16 0.69 0.21 1.96 0.16
Residuals 243 0.22 0.21 0.25 0.20 4.30 0.11
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 26
Table 8. Participant Reaction Results (in two parts). The table shows descriptive statistics (top half of each part) and factorial ANOVA
(bottom half) for reaction. Likert ratings are out of 7 points. The table includes main effects by factor (theme, genre, and trope) as well as
interaction effects between factors. The table includes eight separate factorial ANOVA models on reaction, one for each of the evaluated
reaction measures. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10 , p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001.
Factor / Interactions Interest+ (Interest) Interest- (Concern) Belief+ (Agree) Belief- (No Inuence)
Descriptive n mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd
Total 2000 5.0 1.7 4.5 1.9 5.0 1.6 3.8 1.9
US presidential
campaign donations
1000 5.1 1.6 4.9 1.8 5.2 1.5 3.6 1.9
US sea-level rise 1000 4.8 1.8 4.0 1.9 4.8 1.6 4.0 1.8
Longform infographics 1008 5.1 1.6 4.4 1.9 5.2 1.5 3.6 1.8
Dynamic slideshows 992 4.9 1.8 4.5 1.9 4.8 1.6 4.0 2.0
Leader lines 1000 5.2 1.7 4.6 1.8 5.1 1.6 3.6 1.9
Color highlighting 1000 4.8 1.7 4.3 1.9 4.9 1.5 3.9 1.9
Factorial ANOVA df
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Theme 1 4.62 1.62 0.21 46.66 14.01 0.00 10.82 4.57 0.03 7. 4 0 2.10 0.15
Genre 1 1.61 0.56 0.45 0.48 0.14 0.71 7. 74 3.27 0.07 11. 05 3.14 0.08
Trope 1 12.19 4.26 0.04 5.60 1.68 0.20 3.79 1.60 0.21 5.77 1.64 0.20
Theme : Genre 1 0.08 0.03 0.87 2.35 0.71 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.97 7. 6 6 2.17 0.14
Theme : Trope 1 1.87 0.65 0.42 8.28 2.49 0.12 4.34 1.83 0.18 0.62 0.18 0.68
Genre : Trope 1 13.79 4.81 0.03 3.74 1.12 0.29 0.08 0.03 0.85 2.06 0.58 0.45
Residuals 243 2.86 3.33 2.37 3.52
Factor / Interactions Arousal+ (Excite) Arousal- (Bore) Hedonic+ (Enjoy) Hedonic- (Upset)
Descriptive n mean sd mean sd mean sd mean sd
Total 2000 3.5 1.7 3.1 1.9 4.4 1.8 3.2 1.8
U.S. presidential
campaign donations
1000 3.5 1.7 3.0 1.9 4.4 1.7 3.5 2.0
U.S. sea-level rise 1000 3.5 1.7 3.1 1.9 4.3 1.8 2.9 1.7
Longform infographics 1008 3.3 1.6 2.9 1.8 4.4 1.7 2.9 1.8
Dynamic slideshows 992 3.7 1.7 3.3 2.0 4.3 1.8 3.5 1.9
Leader lines 1000 3.6 1.7 2.9 1.8 4.5 1.7 3.2 1.9
Color highlighting 1000 3.4 1.6 3.2 1.9 4.2 1.8 3.1 1.8
Factorial ANOVA df
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Mean
Sq
F p
Theme 1 0.04 0.01 0.91 0.48 0.14 0.71 0.58 0.19 0.67 23.72 7. 2 4 0.01
Genre 1 7. 7 3 2.76 0.10 9.67 2.78 0.10 0.34 0.11 0.74 21.52 6.57 0.01
Trope 1 3.83 1.37 0.24 6.01 1.72 0.19 4.55 1.47 0.23 0.92 0.28 0.60
Theme : Genre 1 0.16 0.06 0.81 2.30 0.66 0.42 0.19 0.06 0.80 1.60 0.49 0.49
Theme : Trope 1 0.50 0.18 0.67 4.72 1.35 0.25 2.21 0.72 0.40 0.99 0.30 0.58
Genre : Trope 1 4.78 1.71 0.19 5.16 1.48 0.23 9.08 2.94 0.09 0.63 0.19 0.66
Residuals 243 2.80 3.49 3.09 3.28
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 27
Table 9. Inuence of Individual Differences on Retention and Comprehension. The table shows the results of multiple linear regression
between individual differences and retention and comprehension. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10 , p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001.
Yellow indicates an individual difference measure that we removed because it was collinear with another measure.
Individual Difference A: Inuence on Retention B: Inuence on Comprehension
Sea-level rise
Presidential
campaign
donations
Both Sea-level rise
Presidential
campaign
donations
Both
Relation to Visual Story Theme
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
Expertise:
Familiarity
Environment and Science -0.28 0.24 0.08 0.68
Domestic Politics 0.38 0.13 -0.09 0.69
Expertise:
Training
Environment and Science - 0.15 0.39 -0.42 0.01
Domestic Politics -0.06 0.77 - 0.12 0.52
Motivation:
Prior Interest
Environment and Science 0.04 0.84 -0.18 0.29
Domestic Politics -0.28 0.24 0.20 0.33
Prior Beliefs
Socially liberal-v-conservative 0.26 0.08 - 0.18 0.15
Fiscally liberal-v-conservative 0.20 0.19 0.00 0.98
Environmentally conscious-v-agnostic -0.37 0.03 -0.34 0.02
Politically active-v-agnostic -0.22 0.24 -0.05 0.76
Concern about sea-level rise -0.47 0.01 -0.44 0.01
Concern about coastal vulnerable properties
Concern about presidential campaign donations 0.07 0.69
Concern about the presidential election results - 0.12 0.40
I believe sea-level rise is a topic worth discussing 0.39 0.08
I believe presidential campaign donation is a topic worth
discussing
0.10 0.62 0.41 0.03
I believe sea-level rise is a problem 0.29 0.10
I believe presidential election campaign donation is a
problem
Relation to Design and Technology
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
β
p
Expertise:
Familiarity
Print News Sources 0.23 0.11 0.31 0 .11 0.57 0.01 - 0.16 0.29 - 0.13 0.45 -0.32 0.10
Online News Sources -0.65 0.01 -0.77 0.01 -1.20 0.00 -0.58 0.01 -0.56 0.02 -0.89 0.00
Maps -0.35 0.27 -0.26 0.27 -0.51 0.04 0.02 0.92 - 0.12 0.55 0.12 0.59
Computing Technology -0.00 0.59 - 0.13 0.59 -0.37 0.17 -0.22 0.25 -0.21 0.31 -0.57 0.02
The Internet 0.56 0.00 0.96 0.00 1.51 0.00 0.18 0.47 0.38 0.17 0.71 0.03
Information Graphics 0.34 0.72 0.08 0.72 0.45 0.09 0.24 0.18 0.28 0.17 0.44 0.07
Expertise:
Training
Print News Sources - 0.13 0.43 0.23 0.26 -0.05 0.82 -0.02 0.89 0.22 0.20 0.04
Online News Sources 0.826
Maps - 0.13 0.47 -0.47 0.02 -0.63 0.00 0.12 0.44 -0.09 0.63 -0.25
Computing Technology 0.20
The Internet 0.26 0.07 - 0.13 0.42 0.06 0.71 0.25 0.04 0.11 0.41 0.16
Information Graphics 0.304
Motivation:
Prior Interest
Print News Sources -0.32 0.09 -0.53 0.01 -0.80 0.00 -0.27 0.09 - 0.31 0.09 -0.37 0.07
Online News Sources 0.55 0.01 0.58 0.01 1.07 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.39 0.05 1.05 0.00
Maps 0.08 0.67 0.22 0.26 0.28 0.20 0.04 0.81 0.03 0.85 -0.04 0.86
Computing Technology -0.07 0.74 -0.01 0.97 0.16 0.55 - 0.11 0.54 -0.04 0.85 0.06 0.81
The Internet 0.14 0.59 0.26 0.37 0.37 0.26 0.12 0.57 0.13 0.60 0.31 0.29
Information Graphics 0.22 0.29 0.23 0.31 0.32 0.20 -0.27 0.12 - 0.21 0.27 -0.48 0.03
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 28
Table 10. Inuence of Individual Differences on Reaction. The table shows the results of multiple linear regression between individual
differences and reaction. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10 , p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001. Yellow indicates an individual
difference measure that we removed because it was collinear with another measure.
Individual Difference
Arousal+
The visual story excited me.
Arousal-
The visual story bored me.
Hedonic+
I enjoyed the visual story.
Hedonic-
I was upset by the visual story.
Interest+
The visual story interested me.
Interest-
The visual story concern me.
Belief+
I agree with the visual story.
Belief-
The visual story did not
inuence my views.
Relation to Visual Story Theme
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
Expertise:
Familiarity
Environment and Science OR Domestic
Politics
0.93 0.60 1.33 0.03 0.80 0.09 0.76 0.03 0.71 0.01 0.73 0.02 0.81 0.11 1.39 0.01
Expertise:
Training
Environment and Science OR Domestic
Politics
1.15 0.19 1.25 0.03 1.07 0.49 1.08 0.50 0.98 0.85 1.10 0.33 1.09 0.40 1.12 0.28
Motivation:
Prior Interest
Environment and Science OR Domestic
Politics
1.11 0.38 0.89 0.29 1.02 0.85 1.37 0.01 1.15 0.24 1.09 0.46 0.92 0.46 0.94 0.59
Prior Beliefs
Socially liberal-v-conservative OR Fiscally
liberal-v-conservative
0.99 0.92 1.06 0.47 1.15 0.08 1.18 0.03 1.04 0.59 1.10 0.26 0.93 0.35 0.97 0.67
Environmentally conscious-v-agnostic OR
Politically active-v-agnostic
1.10 0.33 1.14 0.18 1.25 0.02 0.98 0.80 1.09 0.37 1.07 0.53 1.14 0.11 1.06 0.56
Concern about sea-level rise OR Concern
about presidential campaign donations
1.07 0.48 1.13 0.20 1.10 0.32 1.18 0.09 1.05 0.60 1.33 0.00 1.24 0.03 0.91 0.33
Concern about coastal vulnerable
properties
Concern about the presidential election
results
I believe sea-level rise is a topic worth
discussing OR I believe presidential
campaign donation is a topic worth
discussing
1.16 0.20 0.77 0.02 1.26 0.04 1.14 0.22 1.41 0.00 1.23 0.07 1.20 0 .11 0.78 0.03
I believe sea-level rise is a problem
I believe Presidential election campaign
donation is a problem
Relation to Design and Technology
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
θ
p
Expertise:
Familiarity
Print News Sources 0.98 0.88 0.95 0.58 0.99 0.90 1.02 0.90 1.10 0.34 0.94 0.55 0.93 0.50 1.06 0.61
Online News Sources 1.02 0.91 0.92 0.57 1.50 0.01 1.00 0.98 1.15 0.36 0.81 0.15 1.16 0.30 1.19 0.24
Maps 0.56 0.00 1.17 0.23 0.73 0.02 1.24 0.09 0.81 0.11 1.11 0.41 0.92 0.53 1.12 0.40
Computing Technology 0.83 0.16 1.22 0 .11 0.94 0.64 1.25 0.07 1.00 0.99 1.03 0.85 0.79 0.07 1.21 0.12
The Internet 0.91 0.57 0.95 0.77 0.77 0.13 0.88 0.42 0.80 0.19 1.05 0.76 0.96 0.82 0.84 0.29
Information Graphics 1.20 0.15 0.94 0.56 0.90 0.44 0.89 0.34 1.01 0.95 1.15 0.25 1.33 0.02 0.69 0.00
Expertise:
Training
Print News Sources 0.86 0.15 1.01 0.90 0.87 0.16 1.13 0.24 0.94 0.53 1.03 0.77 0.93 0.48 1.01 0.89
Online News Sources
Maps 1.26 0.04 0.80 0.05 1.04 0.70 0.92 0.45 1.06 0.59 1.01 0.90 1.06 0.58 0.89 0.26
Computing Technology
The Internet 0.98 0.81 1.18 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.01 0.87 1.00 0.97 0.96 0.61 1.00 0.98 1.11 0.21
Information Graphics
Motivation:
Prior Interest
Print News Sources 1.38 0.00 0.99 0.94 1.15 0.21 1.12 0.34 1.13 0.26 1.18 0.15 1.18 0.14 0.87 0.20
Online News Sources 1.06 0.64 0.95 0.70 1.11 0.41 0.90 0.40 1.03 0.81 1.03 0.79 0.93 0.55 0.93 0.54
Maps 1.20 0.09 0.75 0.01 1.41 0.00 0.91 0.39 1.42 0.00 1.10 0.36 1.27 0.02 0.93 0.47
Computing Technology 1.02 0.88 0.78 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.16 1.14 0.30 1.16 0.23 1.18 0.20 0.81 0.09
The Internet 0.89 0.48 0.96 0. 74 1.04 0.80 0.87 0.36 1.15 0.39 0.95 0.77 1.56 0.01 0.85 0.32
Information Graphics 1.35 0.01 0.96 0.70 1.40 0.01 1.06 0.65 0.96 0.76 0.96 0.76 0.80 0.06 1.04 0.77
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 29
Figure 4. Retention Scores by Factorial Conditions. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10, p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001. Size is used
redundantly with color shading to indicate signicance.
Figure 5. Comprehension Scores by Factorial Conditions. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10, p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001. Size is
used redundantly with color shading to indicate signicance. Figure continues on the next page.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 30
Figure 5 (continued). Comprehension Scores by Factorial Conditions. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10, p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001.
Size is used redundantly with color shading to indicate signicance.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 31
Figure 6. Reaction Scores by Factorial Conditions. Color indicates signicance: p < 0.10, p < 0.05 , p < 0.01, p < 0.001. Size is used
redundantly with color shading to indicate signicance.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 32
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
OVERALL RESULTS
P   
with an overall accuracy of 71.4%, suggesting that the
retention questions were neither obvious nor impossible
(Table 6). As expected, participants performed the best on
the simpler compare (ordinal) tasks (81.9%) and worst on
the more dicult to remember identify (numerical) tasks
(66.2%), with the accuracy for rank (ordinal) tasks in the
middle (71.7%).
Regarding comprehension, participants on average de-
scribed 48.0% of the narrative elements included in the
comprehension coding scheme (Table 7), a relatively rich
discussion about the tested stories given the general au-
dience recruited from Mechanical Turk and open-ended
format of the comprehension question. In contrast, only
12.4% of the responses included a mistake in comprehen-
sion. us, comprehension results generally showed that
three-act narrative structure was eective for map-based
visual storytelling. ere were several notable patterns in
overall comprehension that provide insight into the visual
design of elements in a three-act narrative. Nearly all par-
ticipants (96.0%) clearly stated the problem of the story in
their comprehension response, suggesting that the prob-
lem was the most salient narrative element in both visual
story themes. Although an expected nding, conrmation
that readers focused on the problem is useful for cartogra-
phers and data journalists, as this element should be em-
phasized in the story title and redundantly accented as a
central motif throughout the story. e three next most
commonly mentioned codes related to the characters in
the story: 69.2% of participants described the tension—or
the how the problem impacts the key characters—59.6%
described the protagonist, and 52.4% described the antag-
onist. is suggests that the focus attention strategies ap-
plied to the characters were relatively successful (although
dierentially so by condition, as described in the results by
tropes below). is description also provided evidence that
readers can conceptualize places or regions as characters in
an explicitly geographic story, presenting an opportunity
to add dramatic narrative structuring to map designs in vi-
sual stories. While both stories used Phillips (2012) cause
and eect narrative structure, the cause (32.4%) was dis-
cussed much less frequently than the eect (50.8%), show-
ing a bias towards outcomes compared to drivers in visual
story comprehension. Finally, spatial setting (26.5%), the
clihanger (26.8%), and temporal setting (18.0%) were
described infrequently. Given that the story was map-
based, it was surprising that the geographic location and,
to a lesser degree, the timeframe were not discussed more
in the comprehension responses, although it is possible
that the visual accenting of specic place-based characters
diverted attention away from the overall spatiotemporal
context.
e two strongest reaction registers to the visual stories
were on interest and agreement, receiving an average re-
sponse of 5.0/7 for both measures (Table 8). us, overall
the visual stories captured participant interest—demon-
strating the value of employing maps and graphics for
visual storytelling—and participants generally agreed
with the cause/eect narrative used to structure the story.
Participants also provided slightly positive ratings for their
concern about the story topic (4.5/7), but nearly neutral
ratings about the storys inuence on them (3.8/7). ere
was marginal overall affective impact by arousal, with
positive arousal (excitement; 3.5/7) and negative arous-
al (boredom; 3.1/7) both receiving less than the “neither
agree nor disagree” midpoint of 4.0 out of 7. ere was
a slight positive aective response on the hedonic scale,
with participants finding the experience more pleasant
(enjoyment; 4.4/7) than unpleasant (upsetting; 3.2/7).
STORY MAP THEMES (FACTOR 1)
Factor 1 included two conditions by visual storytelling
theme: US presidential campaign donations and US sea-level
rise. Starting with retention (Table 6), there was no statis-
tical dierence between themes regarding total retention
(F = 2.03, p = 0.16). us, the theme did not impact the
“accuracy” or “correctness” of reading the maps and graph-
ics in the visual story, common metrics used in empirical
map design research. is is a potentially exciting nd-
ing for cartographers and data journalists, suggesting that
the visualized theme may not inuence story retention for
a general audience if the design follows a three-act nar-
rative structure. Looking at specic retention questions,
there were no signicant dierences between themes with
regard to the easy compare (ordinal) tasks (F = 2.44, p =
0.12) and the dicult identify (numerical) tasks (F = 0.27,
p = 0.60). However, there was a significance difference
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 33
between themes in retention for the rank (ordinal) tasks
(F = 25.12, p = 0.00) as well as a signicant interaction ef-
fect between theme and tropes for rank (ordinal) tasks (F =
4.01, p = 0.05). e interaction possibly could be attributed
to the phrasing of sea-level “rise” for the US sea-level rise
condition, which may have suggested an increasing trend,
thus requiring fewer visual cues to focus attention on to
the highest ranked year (see Supplemental Materials).
Similarly, there was no statistical dierence in total com-
prehension between themes in the average number of
narrative elements discussed (F = 1.21, p = 0.27; Table 7),
adding evidence that the visualized theme may not in-
uence performance for a general audience if the design
follows a three-act narrative structure. However, partic-
ipants made more mistakes in comprehension for the US
presidential campaign donations condition (16.0%) than the
US sea-level rise condition (8.8%), a signicant dierence
at alpha = 0.10 (F = 2.98, p = 0.09), potentially pointing to
prior misconceptions about the 2016 US presidential elec-
tion. ere also were several notable dierences in com-
prehension between themes for specic narrative elements.
Participants discussed the spatial (F = 10.49, p = 0.00) and
temporal (F = 6.23, p = 0.01) settings signicantly more
frequently in their open-ended responses for the US pres-
idential campaign donations story than the US sea-level rise
story. In contrast, participants discussed the cause (F =
16.36, p = 0.00) and eect (F = 4.63, p = 0.03) more fre-
quently for the US sea-level rise story than the US presiden-
tial campaign donations story. While there may be a variety
of explanations for these dierences by specic narrative
elements, we suspect that the setting (“swing states”) was
implicitly more central to understanding the US presi-
dential campaign donations story and the cause-eect re-
lationship (“climate change”) was implicitly more central
to understanding the US sea-level rise story, despite con-
trolling the information and design complexity for these
narrative elements in both visual stories. us, while the
theme did not inuence total comprehension, individual
themes and unique visual story designs of these themes are
likely to lend themselves better to some narrative elements
over others. We also found a signicant dierence in com-
prehension for the protagonist (F = 6.02, p = 0.01), which
might be a slight bias in recall for New York generally (the
protagonist in the US sea-level rise story), a populous US
state often dominating media coverage. Signicant dier-
ences in comprehension were not observed for other nar-
rative elements.
Interestingly, participants appeared to have a somewhat
stronger reaction to the US presidential campaign dona-
tions story than the US sea-level rise story, although signif-
icant dierences were not observed for all reaction met-
rics (Table 8). e largest dierence in reaction between
themes regarded participant concern: participants overall
were concerned by the US presidential campaign donation
story (4.9/7), but were neither concerned nor unconcerned
with the US sea-level rise story (4.0/7), a signicant dif-
ference at alpha = 0.01 (F = 14.01, p = 0.00). Participants
also were more upset by the US presidential campaign dona-
tion story (3.5/7) than the US sea-level rise story (2.9/7), a
signicant dierence at alpha = 0.01 (F = 7.24, p = 0.01),
although on average both sets of participants disagreed
with the statement (below 4.0/7) and therefore these rat-
ings should be interpreted as a greater apathy towards the
US sea-level rise story. Participants ultimately agreed more
with the US presidential campaign donation story than the
US sea-level rise story (F = 4.57, p = 0.03), perhaps because
of the increased hedonic reaction to the former story. e
influence of the story theme on participant reaction is
possibly explained by the timing of the study, which was
conducted four months after the polarizing presidential
election of 2016. In contrast, sea-level rise and climate
change broadly work on a longer time scale and within less
well-dened geographic boundaries, a noted challenge for
science communication in getting the public to care about
climate change and its eects (Fish 2020a). Reaction dif-
ferences by theme also may be explained by the scally and
socially liberal lean in the participant sample (Figure 1),
as the US presidential campaign donation story had a subtle
conservative lean (the relationship between political lean-
ing and reaction concern is discussed in more detail under
individual dierences). ere was no statistical dierence
in other reaction metrics.
VISUAL STORYTELLING GENRE (FACTOR 2)
Factor 2 included two conditions by visual storytell-
ing genre: longform infographics and dynamic slideshows.
Unlike themes, overall dierences in retention by genres
were statistically signicant (F = 5.47, p = 0.02) (Table 6).
Participants correctly answered 74.5% of retention ques-
tions for visual stories presented as longform infograph-
ics, but only 68.3% for visual stories containing the same
content but presented as dynamic slideshows. us, it was
the technique used to enforce continuity across narrative
elements (i.e., genres), and not the element content itself
(i.e., themes), that inuenced retention, with participants
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 34
having greater diculty remembering information from
dynamic slideshows. is is an important nding for car-
tography and visual storytelling, as well as science commu-
nication and pedagogy generally, as visual material more
commonly is presented as a discrete slide deck instead of
a continuous graphic or webpage in educational settings
and public presentations. Further, this nding points to
the relevance of emerging design strategies made possible
by new media for map-based visual storytelling, as long-
form infographics enable scrolling at an audience-controlled
pace, whereas dynamic slideshows dose information at a de-
signer-controlled pace. We found signicant dierences
for the easier compare (ordinal) tasks (F = 4.01, p = 0.05)
and more dicult identify (numerical) tasks (F = 8.52, p
= 0.00) tasks, but not for the intermediate-diculty rank
(ordinal) tasks (F = 0.26, p = 0.61), perhaps because of the
aforementioned interaction eect for rank (ordinal) tasks
between theme and tropes.
Regarding comprehension, participants described 49.4%
of the total narrative elements when the story was pre-
sented as longform infographics but only 46.6% when pre-
sented as dynamic slideshows, again indicating better per-
formance with longform infographics. However, this was
not a signicant dierence (F = 0.92, p = 0.34; Table 7),
and overall we observed fewer comprehension dierenc-
es by genres than theme for individual narrative elements.
Interestingly, there was a signicant dierence by genres
in discussion of the problem (F = 6.82, p = 0.01): while
nearly all (99.2%) participants discussed the problem when
viewing longform infographics, only 92.7% of participants
discussed the problem when viewing dynamic slideshows.
Therefore, the dynamic slideshows format and naviga-
tion caused a small set of participants to miss the main
problem altogether in their discussion, a fatal erasure in
comprehension. us, while the retention measures indi-
cated that the dynamic slideshows inhibited recall of spe-
cic numbers for many participants, the comprehension
measures indicated that the dynamic slideshows inhibited
development of a general problem understanding for small
set of participants, together representing the “worst of
both worlds.” One potential explanation for the observed
poorer retention and comprehension for dynamic slideshows
is the manner in which they enforce continuity: clicking
through the frames in dynamic slideshows interrupted the
ow of the story, requiring reloading of new content that
may be exacerbated due to bandwidth lags, altogether
breaking audience concentration. Relatedly, participants
discussed the spatial setting signicantly more frequently
when viewing longform infographics (32.5%) versus dynamic
slideshows (20.3%), possibly because they could more read-
ily access maps—included on only four of nine panels—
through quick scrolling upwards versus reloading a prior
slide. ere was not a signicant dierence in the number
of comprehension mistakes or for other comprehension
codes between genres.
Genres did have a marginal impact on participant reac-
tion (Table 8), although most differences were signifi-
cant only at alpha = 0.10. Participants were more likely to
believe (F = 3.27, p = 0.07) and more likely to have their
views inuenced by (F = 3.14, p = 0.08) stories when pre-
sented as longform infographics versus dynamic slideshows,
an indication of increased inuence and trust evoked by
the emerging “scrollytelling” genre. Notably, participants
reported feeling more upset when viewing dynamic slide-
shows than the longform infographics (F = 6.57, p = 0.01), a
signicant dierence at alpha = 0.05. e negative hedonic
reaction scale did not distinguish between the visual story
content versus design (“I was upset by the visual story),
and it is possible the unpleasant reaction to dynamic slide-
shows is because of the broken experience of the discrete
slide advance. However, this broken nature also may gen-
erate more suspense and anxiety, a characteristic of dy-
namic slideshows that may be useful when the story topic
and framing require a congruently negative aective re-
sponse (Anderson and Robinson 2022). Finally, dynamic
slideshows were rated as both more exciting (F = 2.76, p =
0.10) and more boring (F = 2.78, p = 0.10) than longform
infographics, a somewhat contradictory nding possibly in-
dicating that dynamic slideshows garner a wider variety of
reactions from the audience.
Notably, Factor 2 was assigned between subjects, unlike
Factors 1 and 3, and therefore the results by genre may
be influenced by potential imbalances in sampling (see
Supplemental Materials). Participants who viewed long-
form infographics reported a greater interest in the inter-
net (6.3/7 versus 5.2/7 for dynamic slideshows), computing
technology (5.7/7 versus 4.5/7), and online news (5.1/7
versus 4.3/7), and a greater familiarity with computing
technology (5.6/7 versus 4.8/7). us, the generally ob-
served benet of longform infographics instead may be ex-
plained by increased participant motivation derived from
greater interest and familiarity with internet and comput-
ing technologies. In contrast, participants who viewed dy-
namic slideshows reported greater training in the internet
(5.2/7 versus 4.4/7 for longform infographics), environment
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 35
and science (4.1/7 versus 2.8/7), online news (4.2/7 ver-
sus 3.0), domestic politics (3.9/7 versus 2.4/7), information
graphics (3.7/7 versus 2.8/7), maps (3.8/7 versus 2.9/7)
and print news (3.4/7 versus 2.6/7). us, maps and vi-
sual storytelling generally were less novel for participants
assigned to dynamic slideshows and therefore this could
have inuenced motivation, prior expectations, and, ac-
cordingly, performance with dynamic slideshows. Sampling
by domain-specic characteristics not captured through
participant demographics is dicult to manage through
Mechanical Turk, and thus future research with purpose-
ful participant recruitment is needed to investigate how
well the observed dierences by genre apply across dier-
ent levels of interest, familiarity, and training.
VISUAL STORY TROPE (FACTOR 3)
Factor 3 included two conditions by visual storytelling
trope, with both conditions employing a visual accenting
technique for focusing attention: leader lines and color high-
lighting. Dierences in retention by tropes were statistical-
ly signicant at alpha = 0.10 (F = 3.51, p = 0.06; Table 6).
Participants correctly answered 73.8% of retention ques-
tions for visual stories using leader lines as the focus atten-
tion strategy, but only 69.1% using color highlighting. While
a weaker inuence on retention than the genres condition
in our study, the dierence by tropes extends the Grin
and Robinson (2015) study in the context of visual accent-
ing between coordinated representations, suggesting that
leader lines are not only a viable alternative to color high-
lighting when color needs to be used elsewhere in design,
but actually are a more salient focusing attention tech-
nique generally. ere were no signicant dierences by
tropes for the easier compare (ordinal) (F = 1.83, p = 0.18)
or rank (ordinal) (F = 1.19, p = 0.28) retention questions,
but differences by tropes for the more difficult identify
(numerical) task were signicant at alpha = 0.10 (F = 3.28,
p = 0.07). us, the benet of leader lines over color high-
lightingand thus more salient focusing attention tech-
niques—may increase as the diculty in the task grows.
Tropes did not result in a signicant dierence in total
comprehension (F = 0.11, p = 0.74), the number of com-
prehension mistakes (F = 0.29, p = 0.59), or any specic
narrative element (Table 7). We were surprised that none
of the tested factors resulted in signicant dierences in
total comprehension. Although we found the compre-
hension discussion surprisingly rich, with participants on
average describing 48.0% of the narrative elements, the
simplicity of the comprehension question prompt and the
online format of the survey perhaps limited the response
length. Greater depth in comprehension instead may be
elicited through alternative social science methods such as
cognitive walkthroughs, think aloud studies, and post-hoc
interviews and focus groups. However, our method did
present an opportunity to investigate how the visual story
design influenced discussion of the more important or
obvious narrative elements in their shorter qualitative re-
sponses, resulting in the signicant dierences by themes
and tropes for individual narrative elements described
above.
e trope conditions did result in a signicant dierence
in participants’ reported interest in the visual story (F =
4.25, p = 0.04; Table 8). Participants reported being more
interested in visual stories using leader lines (5.2/7) to focus
attention than color highlighting (4.8/7). “Interest” suggests
an activated aective state, and while we did not observe
a significant difference in positive arousal (which uses
the more suggestive word “excited” to describe reaction),
increased interest in a visual story is a marked benet of
using focusing attention techniques in visual story design:
in this case, leader lines better focused audience attention
on important or unusual information in the story, avoiding
distraction from other design elements or split attention
with other tasks. ere also was a signicant interaction
in reported interest between the genre and tropes factors
(F = 4.81, p = 0.03), indicating that participants were most
interested in visual stories using a combination of longform
infographics and leader lines regardless of the theme. Again,
this is a useful nding for cartographers and data journal-
ists, as the specic theme may not inuence the interest
garnered from a general audience as long as the visual
story follows empirically-derived design recommendations
for a three-act narrative, genres, and tropes. ere were
no addition signicant dierences by tropes in the other
participant reaction scales.
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
Finally, the exit survey collected a number of measures
of individual dierences, including expertise, motivation,
and prior beliefs. Examination of individual dierences
identied many interaction eects on retention, compre-
hension, and reaction. Our discussion below focuses on
the most prominent patterns.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 36
Regarding retention, the relationship of individuals to
technology and design was a stronger driver than their re-
lationship to the theme or their prior beliefs (Table 9). In
particular, participants with greater familiarity with the
internet (β= 1.51, p = 0.00) retained signicantly more in-
formation from the visual stories than their counterparts.
is signals an important consideration for data journal-
ism and visual storytelling, as dierential familiarity (i.e.,
expertise) with the online delivery format of the map study
may have impacted results, with participants unfamiliar
with internet technology retaining less information from
the online stories.
ere was an interesting tradeo in retention between fa-
miliarity and interest in print versus online news sourc-
es. Participants with interest in online news sources (β=
1.07, p = 0.00) retained significantly more information
than their counterparts, while participants with interest
in print news sources retained signicantly less than their
counterparts (β= -0.80, p = 0.00). Familiarity with online
news sources (β= -1.20, p = 0.00) and print news sourc-
es (β= 0.57, p = 0.00) reected an inverse pattern. While
future research is needed to track and conrm this eect
by individual dierences, the results possibly suggest that
performance with online visual stories is inuenced by in-
terest in online versus print news sources broadly, but also
suggest a possible tendency to skim visually as familiarity
with online news sources increases.
In contrast, the relationship of individuals to the theme
and their prior beliefs was a stronger relative driver of
comprehension than their relationship to technology and
design (Table 9). As with retention, participants with in-
creased familiarity with the internet (β= 0.71, p = 0.03)
and interest in online news sources (β= 1.05, p = 0.00)
comprehended the visual stories signicantly better than
their counterparts, although this eect was smaller than
with retention. While increased familiarity with on-
line news stories decreased comprehension (β= -0.89, p
= 0.00), similar to retention, there were no observed ef-
fects from familiarity or interest in print news sources on
comprehension.
Instead, increased prior beliefs that sea-level rise is a
topic worth of discussion (β= 0.41, p = 0.03) led to in-
creased comprehension with the US sea-level rise theme.
Interestingly, increased participant training in environ-
ment and science (β= -0.42, p = 0.01) led to reduced com-
prehension about the US sea-level rise theme, suggesting
that participants with some expertise about the theme
actually gleaned fewer specic details from the visual sto-
ries, instead relying on their prior understanding rather
than drawing from specic evidence in the story. is is an
interesting nding, as untrained, non-experts actually may
approach visual stories more objectively, and thus consider
new information and the overall narrative more thorough-
ly, as long as they believe the topic is worthy of discussion.
It is arguable, however, that the subjectivity exhibited by
experts may be an appropriate, hard-earned subjectivity,
allowing them to discredit awed or incomplete informa-
tion and narratives more quickly. Unexpectedly, increased
environmental consciousness and increased concern about
sea-level rise both led to reduced retention and compre-
hension for the US sea-level rise theme, an apparent con-
tradiction to prior beliefs that sea-level rise is a topic worth
discussion.
We did not nd any signicant relationships between prior
beliefs and retention or comprehension of the US presiden-
tial campaign donations condition. is perhaps is due to
the polarizing nature of the 2016 US presidential election,
but broadly indicates that the specic theme matters when
considering individual dierences.
While there are some notable interactions with reten-
tion and comprehension, individual dierences appeared
to have a greater inuence on participant reaction to the
visual stories (Table 10). There were several broad pat-
terns between individual dierences and reaction worth
discussing.
First, familiarity and interest with maps and information
graphics arguably had the largest inuence on the reaction
measures regarding participant relationships to technolo-
gy and design. e more familiar participants were with
maps, the less likely participants were excited by (θ= 0.56,
p = 0.00) or enjoyed (θ= 0.73, p = 0.02) the visual stories,
possibility suggesting that novelty in design plays a role in
the reaction to map-based visual stories. However, greater
interest in maps led to a decrease in boredom (θ= 0.75, p =
0.01) with the visual stories and an increase in enjoyment
(θ= 1.41, p = 0.00), interest (θ= 1.42, p = 0.00), and agree-
ment with the visual stories (θ= 1.27, p = 0.02). Similarly,
greater interest in information graphics led to increased
excitement (θ= 1.35, p = 0.01) and enjoyment (θ= 1.40, p
= 0.01). us, individual dierences in motivation around
data-driven visuals like maps and graphics matter in the
resulting reaction to visual stories containing these maps
and graphics.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 37
Second, with a few exceptions, familiarity with the story
theme had a greater overall eect on reaction than train-
ing or interest in the topic. As with retention and compre-
hension, greater familiarity with the theme often resulted
in a more negative reaction, as participants reported high-
er boredom (θ=1.33, p = 0.03) and maintenance of their
beliefs about the topic (θ= 1.39, p = 0.01), as well as being
less upset by (θ= 0.76, p = 0.03), interested in (θ= 0.71, p
= 0.01), and concerned about (θ= 0.73, p = 0.02) the visu-
al story when they had greater familiarity with the topic.
While future research is needed to understand this rela-
tionship between expertise with and reaction to visual sto-
ries, these ndings suggest that visual stories may evoke
stronger positive reactions from general audiences less fa-
miliar with the story theme.
ird, as with comprehension, prior beliefs that the story
theme was worth discussing did inuence participant re-
action. Participants more likely to find the topic worth
discussing also were more likely to enjoy (θ= 1.26, p =
0.04) and be interested in (θ= 1.41, p = 0.00) the visual
story as well as less likely to be bored by (θ= 0.77, p = 0.02)
or maintain their beliefs about the visual story (θ= 0.78,
p = 0.03). us, getting audiences to care about the topic
is an important challengeperhaps the challenge—in vi-
sual storytelling, as the way the audience values the topic
before viewing the map appears to greatly inuence how
they subsequently react to the design and comprehend the
depicted content. Unlike comprehension, this pattern does
hold when reactions are pooled across the US presidential
campaign donations and US sea-level rise themes.
CONCLUSION: IMPROVING THE DESIGN OF MAP-BASED VISUAL STORIES
I  , we reported on an empirical study to un-
derstand and improve the intentional design of map-based
visual storytelling using a case study in data journalism.
Compared to their popularity and wide reach, empirical
research on map-based visual stories remains limited. e
research reported here tackled four emerging design con-
siderations for visual storytelling with maps: story map
themes and their constituent three-act narrative elements,
visual storytelling genres, visual storytelling tropes, and
individual dierences among the audience. Specically,
we asked four research questions to address emerging de-
sign considerations for visual storytelling:
1. What is the inuence of story map themes and their
constituent narrative elements on the audience’s
retention, comprehension, and reaction? Our study
provided initial evidence that a three-act narra-
tive and its constituent narrative elements can be
applied consistently and eectively across visual
story themes, and therefore oers new design
opportunities for cartography and data journalism.
Story map themes did not signicantly inuence
total retention, the “accuracy” or “correctness”
measure used in this study, or total compre-
hension, our alternative performance measure
capturing additional dimensions of engagement
and interest. is nding points to the need for
establishing a research and education agenda on
map-based visual storytelling in both cartography
and data journalism, as the ecacy of some design
decisions are based on not on the story content,
but on the intentional design of the narrative
structure and presentation. Interestingly, partic-
ipants discussed the spatial and temporal setting
signicantly more frequently for the US presiden-
tial campaign donations story and the cause and ef-
fect more frequently for the US sea-level rise story,
potentially indicating that, while themes may not
inuence total comprehension, some individual
narrative elements may be more or less germane
to understanding a given visual story. In contrast,
story themes did inuence audience reaction, with
participants feeling signicantly more concerned
about and upset with the US presidential campaign
donations story, and they ultimately agreed more
with this story, perhaps because of the increased
negative hedonic reaction. While not a direct goal
of our study, this nding reinforces noted chal-
lenges for communication and action on climate
change in the United States.
ere are many opportunities for future research
on narrative structures for map-based storytell-
ing, three-act or otherwise. First, we tested two
visual story themes using the same three-act nar-
rative structure as a control to establish a baseline
for three-act narrative design in cartography and
also mitigate bias from current events or prior be-
liefs given the broader visual story design consid-
erations in the factorial design. More research is
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 38
needed to test the baseline three-act narrative we
described against alternative linear and non-linear
narrative structures, as well as to isolate the in-
uence of specic narrative elements within these
structures to understand how they may be rear-
ranged as narrative anchor points within a visu-
al story. Further, we encourage comparison and
evaluation of a wider range of Vujaković’s (2014)
visual story themes and Phillips’s (2012) visual
story structures, as well as correlation of how well
these designs perform with individual dierenc-
es. Finally, the three-act narrative structure relied
mostly on static visuals, with user interactivity re-
stricted to the genre mechanism for enforcing con-
tinuity in the factorial design (continuous scroll-
ing versus discrete slide advancement). Extensions
with interactivity range from martini-glass and
reverse martini-glass narrative structures plac-
ing interactive maps at the bookends of the visual
story (Segel and Heer 2010) to fully open-ended
and user-controlled interactive digital narratives
(Koenitz et al. 2015).
2. What is the inuence of visual storytelling genres
on the audience’s retention, comprehension, and
reaction? Visual storytelling genres did signicant-
ly inuence total retention. Longform infographics
outperformed dynamic slideshows for both retention
and comprehension, although this dierence was
not signicant for total comprehension. However,
we did observe a signicant dierence in com-
prehension of the problem—the central confron-
tation, obstacle, or setback driving the story that
formed perhaps the most important narrative
element of the story—with nearly all partici-
pants discussing the problem in their open-ended
responses when viewing longform infographics.
Taken together, dynamic slideshows exhibited the
worst of both worlds, causing participants to for-
get specic information (total retention) and, for
some, to miss the overall point of the visual story
(problem comprehension). e poorer performance
with dynamic slideshows likely is attributed to the
manner by which the genre enforces continuity
and doses information, as longform infographics
enabled continuous scrolling at an audience-con-
trolled pace, whereas dynamic slideshows discretely
dosed information in a designer-controlled pace.
is nding also calls into question the optimal
structure for dosing information in both research
and teaching, given that material is commonly
presented as a slideshow for in-person presenta-
tions. While the genre had a weaker inuence on
reaction than the story theme, participants were
more upset with stories presented as dynamic slide-
shows, potentially an aective response attributed
more to the broken nature of the genre structure
than the story content.
Our study suggests that choosing a storytelling
genre as described by Segel and Heer (2010) and
Roth (2021) is a nontrivial design decision, and
thus warrants additional research in cartography,
data journalism, and related elds. We examined
just two visual storytelling genres and future re-
search is needed to fully understand the relative
advantages and limitations of each genre to in-
form their selection, content, and design. Notably,
our ndings contradict those of Wieczorek et al.
(2014) on non-visual text presentation, where pag-
ination (slideshows) outperformed scrolling (long-
form structure). We hypothesize that this could
be attributed either to the inherently two-dimen-
sional nature of maps versus one-dimensional text
or the dierence in control of dosing in our study
versus the increased dosing of the pagination con-
ditions in the Wieczorek et al. study. Regardless,
future research is needed to evaluate different
combinations of text and visuals like maps across
genres, as well as to compare text, visuals, and
other multimedia directly against one another as
alternative story content within any given genre.
As noted above, further research also is needed to
investigate how well the observed dierences by
genre apply across dierent levels of audience in-
terest, familiarity, and training.
3. What is the inuence of visual storytelling tropes
on the audience’s retention, comprehension, and
reaction? As with genres, the focus attention
strategies (one visual storytelling trope) signi-
cantly inuenced total retention, although only
at alpha = 0.10. Retention signicantly improved
when narrative elements were accented by leader
lines instead of color highlighting. While a weak-
er inuence than genres, this nding extends
Grin and Robinson’s (2015) recommendations
for using leader lines for visual accenting across
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 39
multiple representations, as leader lines are not just
an alternative to color highlighting when using color
elsewhere in design, but actually are a more salient
focusing attention technique generally. e benet
of leader lines over color highlighting increased as the
question diculty grew, suggesting more salient
visual accenting techniques are needed as task
complexity increases. As with other factors, there
was not a signicant dierence in total compre-
hension between focus attention strategies, and we
encourage adapting, extending, and triangulating
alternative social science methods in the future to
explore additional dimensions of audience com-
prehension. As with genres, tropes had a weaker
inuence on reaction than the story theme, but
we did observe a signicant dierence in reported
interest by tropes, with leader lines better focus-
ing audience attention on important or unusual
information in the story and avoiding distraction
from other design elements or split attention with
other tasks.
For future research, we encourage evaluation of
the additional visual accenting techniques for fo-
cusing attention in visual storytelling compiled in
Roth (2021), including comparing static solutions
like flow arrows, appended geometric frames,
opacity masks, numbering, call-outs, and labels,
against dynamic solutions like blinking/flicker-
ing, panning/zooming, and focus+context visual-
izations. Further, our attention solution primar-
ily supported elementary tasks similar to Grin
and Robinson (2015), but the leader lines and color
highlighting solutions also should be evaluated
for general map reading tasks, such as provid-
ing overview and summary context for narrative
and exploratory visualization alike (Shneiderman
1996). Finally, we examined continuity (tested
through genres) and attention in our study, hold-
ing all other tropes constant for experimental con-
trol. Future research opportunities exist to explore
and empirically test the roles of mood, dosing, re-
dundancy, metaphor, and voice to support visual
storytelling with maps.
4. What is the inuence of individual audience
dierences on their retention, comprehension,
and reaction? Examining individual dierences
aorded insight into how dimensions of expertise,
motivation, and prior beliefs inuence retention,
comprehension, and reaction. Familiarity with the
internet and familiarity and interest with print
versus online news sources most impacted reten-
tion. While familiarity and interest with online
news sources remained inuential on compre-
hension, prior beliefs that the topic is worthy
of discussion also inuenced comprehension.
Notably, interaction eects regarding prior beliefs
and comprehension were observed for the US
sea-level rise theme only, suggesting that the visual
storytelling theme does matter when considering
individual dierences. Whereas dierences in
genres and trope designs directly inuenced reten-
tion and comprehension—with some variability by
individual dierences—individual dierences, not
the visual story design, appeared to have a greater
overall inuence on participant reaction to the
visual stories. Familiarity with maps and infor-
mation graphics, familiarity with the story theme,
and prior beliefs that the story theme was worth
discussing were among the inuential individual
dierences on participant reaction.
Opportunities for future research on individu-
al dierences in visual storytelling (and cartog-
raphy generally) are numerous. First, our use of
Mechanical Turk, while successful in garnering
wider demographic, geographic, and political di-
versity, limited our ability to assess the inuence
of individual dierences on the tested visual story
design considerations themselves (i.e., by theme,
genres, or tropes). Future research is needed to
replicate our results in a controlled setting with
participants purposefully sampled by individual
differences into comparable groups. Second, we
evaluated just a small range of individual dier-
ences by expertise, motivation, and prior beliefs.
Future research is needed to understand how in-
dividual dierences and intersectional identities
shape understandings from maps and visual sto-
ries (D’Ignazio and Klein 2020), with particu-
lar attention on how our reactions might change
through time around critical events or across
other lived experiences given the increased role
maps play in new stories and data journalism.
Relatedly, and following calls from Kosara and
Mackinlay (2013) and Figueiras (2014), future
research is needed to extend our initial treatment
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 40
of retention, comprehension, and reaction to fully
embrace new measures of engagement, empa-
thy, and emotion resulting from different visu-
al story designs, as the real test of visual story-
telling is its ability to help us make better, more
informed decisions in how we treat ourselves,
each other, and our world. Finally, self-report-
ed, Likert-based measures are a relatively simple
method of capturing information about individual
dierences—necessarily so for the purpose of this
study—and alternative methods that more reliably
screen for interest, familiarity, training, and prior
beliefs are needed to fully explore the role of in-
dividual dierences on the design of map-based
visual stories. This limitation also relates to the
potential issues related to the sampling imbalance
between genre conditions noted above.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
is research was funded by NSF CAREER Grant #1555267 and the Wisconsin Alumni Foundation. We wish to thank
Tanya Buckingham Andersen and Qunying Huang for their feedback on the online map study design and analysis.
REFERENCES
Allen, Mike, ed. 2017. e SAGE Encyclopedia of
Communication Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.
Anderson, Cary L., and Anthony C. Robinson. 2022.
Aective Congruence in Visualization Design:
Inuences on Reading Categorical Maps.IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
28 (8): 28672878. https://doi.org/10.1109/
tvcg.2021.3050118.
Andrienko, Natalia, Gennady Andrienko, and Peter
Gatalsky. 2003. “Exploratory Spatio-temporal
Visualization: An Analytical Review.Journal of Visual
Languages and Computing 14: 503–541. https://doi.
org/10.1016/s1045-926x(03)00046-6.
Bostock, Mike. 2014. “How To Scroll.http://bost.ocks.
org/mike/scroll.
Brant, Rollin. 1990. “Assessing Proportionality in
the Proportional Odds Model for Ordinal Logistic
Regression.Biometrics 46 (4): 11711178. https://doi.
org/10.2307/2532457.
Bushell, Sally. 2012. “e Slipperiness of Literary Maps:
Critical Cartography and Literary Cartography.
Cartographica 47 (3): 149–160. https://doi.org/10.3138/
carto.47.3.1202.
Cairo, Alberto. 2017. Nerd Journalism: How Data
and Digital Technology Transformed News Graphics.
Barcelona: Universitat Oberta de Catalunya.
Caquard, Sébastien. 2011. “Cartographies of Fictional
Worlds: Conclusive Remarks.e Cartographic Journal
48 (4): 224225. https://doi.org/10.1179/00087041
1X13203362557264.
——. 2013. “Cartography I: Mapping Narrative
Cartography.” Progress in Human Geography 37 (1):
135144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132511423796.
Caquard, Sébastien, and William Cartwright. 2014.
Narrative Cartography: From Mapping Stories to the
Narrative of Maps and Mapping.e Cartographic
Journal 51 (2): 101106. https://doi.org/10.1179/00087
04114Z.000000000130.
Caquard, Sébastien, and D. R. Fraser Taylor.
2009. “What is Cinematic Cartography?” e
Cartographic Journal 46 (1): 5–8. https://doi.
org/10.1179/000870409X430951.
Cartwright, William. 1999. “Extending
the Map Metaphor using Web Delivered
Multimedia.” International Journal of Geographical
Information Science 13 (4): 335–353. https://doi.
org/10.1080/136588199241238.
Cattoor, Bieke, and Chris Perkins. 2014. “Re-
Cartographies of Landscape: New Narratives in
Architectural Atlases.e Cartographic Journal 51
(2): 166178. https://doi.org/10.1179/174327741
3Y.0000000076.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 41
Caudle, Sharon L. 2004. “Qualitative Data Analysis.
In Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation, Second
Edition, edited by Joseph S. Whorley, Harry P. Hatry,
and Kathryn E. Newcomer, 417438. San Francisco:
Wiley
Chapin, Mac, Zachary Lamb, and Bill relkeld. 2005.
Mapping Indigenous Lands.” Annual Review of
Anthropology 34: 619–638. https://doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.anthro.34.081804.120429.
Cohen, Georey L. 2012. “Identity, Belief, and Bias.” In
Ideology, Psychology, and Law, edited by Jon Hanson,
385–403. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cronon, William. 1992. “A Place for Stories: Nature,
History, and Narrative.e Journal of American History
78 (4): 13471376. https://doi.org/10.2307/2079346.
D’Ignazio, Catherine, and Lauren Klein. 2020. Data
Feminism. Boston: MIT Press.
Denil, Mark. 2017. “Storied Maps.Cartographic
Perspectives 84: 5–22. https://doi.org/10.14714/
CP84.1374.
Eccles, Ryan, omas Kapler, Robert Harper, and
William Wright. 2008. “Stories in Geotime.
Information Visualization 7 (1): 317. https://doi.
org/10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500173.
Elwood, Sarah. 2006. “Beyond Cooptation or Resistance:
Urban Spatial Politics, Community Organizations, and
GIS-Based Spatial Narratives.Annals of the Association
of American Geographers 96 (2): 323–341. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.2006.00480.x.
Engebretsen, Martin, and Helen Kennedy. 2020. Data
Visualization in Society. Amsterdam: Amsterdam
University Press.
Figueiras, Ana. 2014. “How to Tell Stories Using
Visualization.” Paper read at 18th International
Conference on Information Visualisation. https://doi.
org/10.1109/IV.2014.78.
Fish, Carolyn S. 2020a. “Cartographic Content Analysis
of Compelling Climate Change Communication.
Cartography and Geographic Information Science 47 (6):
492507. https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2020.17
74421.
——. 2020b. “Storytelling for Making Cartographic
Design Decisions for Climate Change Communication
in the United States.Cartographica 55 (2): 69–84.
https://doi.org/10.3138/cart-2019-0019.
Gershon, Nahum, and Ward Page. 2001. “What
Storytelling Can Do for Information Visualization.
Communications of the ACM 44 (8): 3137. https://doi.
org/10.1145/381641.381653.
Gray, Jonathan, Lucy Chambers, and Liliana Bounegru.
2012. e Data Journalism Handbook: How Journalists
Can Use Data to Improve the News: Sebastopol: O’Reilly
Media.
Grin, Amy L., and Julia McQuoid. 2012. “At the
Intersection of Maps and Emotion: e Challenge of
Spatially Representing Experience.Kartographische
Nachrichten 62 (6): 291–299.
Grin, Amy L., and Anthony C. Robinson. 2015.
“Comparing Color and Leader Line Highlighting
Strategies in Coordinated View Geovisualizations.
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer
Graphics 21 (3): 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TVCG.2014.2371858.
Grin, Amy L., Travis White, Carolyn Fish, Beate
Tomio, Haosheng Huang, Claudia Robbi Sluter,
João Vitor Meza Bravo, Sara I. Fabrikant, Susanne
Bleisch, Melissa Yamada, and Péricles Picanço. 2017.
“Designing across Map Use Contexts: A Research
Agenda.” International Journal of Cartography 3 (sup1):
90114. https://doi.org/10.1080/23729333.2017.1315
988.
Haklay, Muki, Alex Singleton, and Chris Parker.
2008. “Web Mapping 2.0: e Neogeography of
the GeoWeb.” Geography Compass 2 (6): 2011–2039.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2008.00167.x.
Haraway, Donna J. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women:
e Reinvention of Nature: New York: Routledge.
Harley, J. B. 1989. “Deconstructing the Map.
Cartographica 26 (2): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3138/
E635-7827-1757-9T53.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 42
Harrower, Mark, and Benjamin Sheesley. 2005.
“Designing Better Map Interfaces: A Framework for
Panning and Zooming.Transactions in GIS 9 (2): 77
89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9671.2005.00207.x.
Hauser, David, Gabrielle Paolacci, and Jesse Chandler.
2019. “Common concerns with MTurk as a participant
pool: Evidence and solutions.” In Handbook of
Research Methods in Consumer Psychology, edited
by Frank R. Kardes, Paul M. Herr, and Norbert
Schwarz, 319–337. New York: Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9781351137713-17.
Hullman, Jessica, Steven Drucker, Nathalie Henry Riche,
Bongshin Lee, Danyel Fisher, and Eytan Adar. 2013.
A Deeper Understanding of Sequence in Narrative
Visualization.IEEE Transactions on Visualization and
Computer Graphics 19 (12): 24062415. https://doi.
org/10.1109/TVCG.2013.119.
Joliveau, ierry. 2009. “Connecting Real and Imaginary
Places through Geospatial Technologies: Examples
from Set-jetting and Art-oriented Tourism.e
Cartographic Journal 46 (1): 3645. https://doi.
org/10.1179/000870409X415570.
Kent, Alexander. 2017. “Trust me, I’m a Cartographer:
Post-truth and the Problem of Acritical Cartography.
e Cartographic Journal 54 (3): 193195. https://doi.or
g/10.1080/00087041.2017.1376489.
Koenitz, Hartmut, Gabriele Ferri, Mads Haahr, Diğdem
Sezen, and Tonguç İbrahim Sezen. 2015. Interactive
Digital Narrative: History, eory and Practice. New
York: Routledge.
Kosara, Robert, and Jock Mackinlay. 2013. “Storytelling:
e Next Step for Visualization.Computer 46 (5):
44–50. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2013.36.
Lavery, Matthew Ryan, Parul Acharya, Stephen A.
Sivo, and Lihua Xu. 2019. “Number of Predictors and
Multicollinearity: What are their Eects on Error
and Bias in Regression?” Communications in Statistics-
Simulation and Computation 48 (1): 27–38. https://doi.
org/10.1080/03610918.2017.1371750.
Lidwell, William, Kritina Holden, and Jill Butler. 2010.
Universal Principles of Design, Revised and Updated: 125
Ways to Enhance Usability, Inuence Perception, Increase
Appeal, Make Better Design Decisions, and Teach through
Design. Beverly, MA: Rockport Pub.
Ma, Kwan-Liu, Isaac Liao, Jennifer Frazier, Helwig
Hauser, and Helen-Nicole Kostis. 2012. “Scientic
Storytelling Using Visualization.” IEEE Computer
Graphics and Applications 32 (1): 12–19. https://doi.
org/10.1109/MCG.2012.24.
Macfarlane, Robert. 2007. e Wild Places. New York:
Penguin.
McCullagh, Peter. 1980. “Regression Models for
Ordinal Data.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society:
Series B (Methodological) 42 (2): 109127. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1980.tb01109.x.
Miller, Christopher C. 2006. “A Beast in the Field:
e Google Maps Mashup as GIS/2.Cartographica
41 (3): 187199. https://doi.org/10.3138/
J0L0-5301-2262-N779.
Monmonier, M. 1989. Maps with the News: e
Development of American Journalistic Cartography.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
——. 1992. “Authoring Graphic Scripts: Experiences
and Principles.Cartography and Geographic
Information Systems 19 (4): 247–260. https://doi.
org/10.1559/152304092783721240.
Montello, Dan, and Paul Sutton. 2012. An Introduction
to Scientic Research Methods in Geography and
Environmental Studies. ousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Moretti, Franco. 2005. Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract
Models for a Literary History. London: Verso.
Muehlenhaus, Ian. 2014. “Looking at the Big Picture:
Adapting Film eory to Examine Map Form,
Meaning, and Aesthetic.Cartographic Perspectives 77:
4666. https://doi.org/10.14714/CP77.1239.
Nathans, Laura L., Frederick L. Oswald, and Kim
Nimon. 2012. “Interpreting Multiple Linear
Regression: A Guidebook of Variable Importance.
Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation 17 (1): 9.
https://doi.org/10.7275/5fex-b874.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 43
Nielsen, Jacob. 2006. “F-shaped Pattern for Reading
Web Content.Nielsen Norman Group. https://www.
nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-
content-discovered.
Ormeling, Ferjan. 1995. “New Forms, Concepts,
and Structures for European National Atlases.
Cartographic Perspectives 20: 1220. https://doi.
org/10.14714/CP20.890.
Pearce, Margaret Wickens, and Renee Pualani Louis.
2008. “Mapping Indigenous Depth of Place.American
Indian Culture and Research Journal 32 (3): 107126.
Pearce, Margaret Wickens. 2008. “Framing the Days:
Place and Narrative in Cartography.Cartography and
Geographic Information Science 35 (1): 17–32. https://
doi.org/10.1559/152304008783475661.
——. 2009. “Place Codes: Narrative and Dialogical
Strategies for Cartography.” Paper read at 24th
International Cartographic Conference, November 15–21,
Santiago, Chile.
——. 2014. “e Last Piece is You.e Cartographic
Journal 51 (2): 107122. https://doi.org/10.1179/17432
77414Y.0000000078.
Phillips, Jonathan. 2012. “Storytelling in Earth
Sciences: e Eight Basic Plots.Earth-Science
Reviews 115 (3): 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
earscirev.2012.09.005.
Riche, Nathalie Henry, Christophe Hurter, Nicholas
Diakopoulos, and Sheelagh Carpendale. 2018. Data-
Driven Storytelling. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Robinson, Anthony C. 2011. “Highlighting in
Geovisualization.” Cartography and Geographic
Information Science 38 (4): 373–383. https://doi.
org/10.1559/15230406384373.
Rogers, Simon. 2014. “Data Journalism is the New
Punk.” British Journalism Review 25 (2): 3134. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0956474814538181.
Rose, Gillian. 1997. “Situating Knowledges: Positionality,
Reexivities and Other Tactics.Progress in
Human Geography 21 (3): 305–320. https://doi.
org/10.1191/030913297673302122.
Roth, Robert E. 2009. “e Impact of User
Expertise on Geographic Risk Assessment under
Uncertain Conditions.Cartography and Geographic
Information Science 36 (1): 29–43. https://doi.
org/10.1559/152304009787340160.
——. 2013. “An Empirically-derived Taxonomy of
Interaction Primitives for Interactive Cartography and
Geovisualization.” IEEE Transactions on Visualization
& Computer Graphics 19 (12): 2356–2365. https://doi.
org/10.1109/TVCG.2013.130.
——. 2021. Cartographic Design as Visual
Storytelling: Synthesis and Review of Map-based
Narratives, Genres, and Tropes. e Cartographic
Journal 58 (1): 83–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00087
041.2019.1633103.
Roth, Robert E., and Mark Harrower. 2008. “Addressing
Map Interface Usability: Learning from the Lakeshore
Nature Preserve Interactive Map.Cartographic
Perspectives 60: 4666. https://doi.org/10.14714/
CP60.231.
Segel, Edward, and Jerey Heer. 2010. “Narrative
Visualization: Telling Stories with Data.” IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
16 (6): 1139–1148. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TVCG.2010.179.
Shneiderman, Ben. 1996. “e Eyes Have It: A Task by
Data Type Taxonomy for Information Visualization.
Paper read at IEEE Conference on Visual Languages, at
Boulder, CO.
Sieber, Renée E., Pamela J. Robinson, Peter A. Johnson,
and Jon M. Corbett. 2016. “Doing Public Participation
on the Geospatial Web.Annals of the American
Association of Geographers 106 (5): 1030–1046. https://
doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2016.1191325.
Smith, Jonathan M. 1996. “Geographical Rhetoric:
Modes and Tropes of Appeal.Annals of the Association
of American Geographers 86 (1): 1–20. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1996.tb01743.x.
Cartographic Perspectives, Number 100, FORTHCOMING Visual Storytelling with Maps Song et al. | 44
Stolper, Charles D., Bongshin Lee, Nathalie Henry
Riche, and John Stasko. 2016. Emerging and Recurring
Data-driven Storytelling Techniques: Analysis of a
Curated Collection of Recent Stories. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/
research/publication/emerging-and-recurring-data-
driven-storytelling-techniques-analysis-of-a-curated-
collection-of-recent-stories.
Sui, Daniel, and Michael Goodchild. 2011. “e
Convergence of GIS and Social Media: Challenges
for GIScience.International Journal of Geographical
Information Science 25 (11): 17371748. https://doi.org/
10.1080/13658816.2011.604636.
Sweeney, M., M. Maguire, and B. Shackel. 1993.
“Evaluating User-computer Interaction: A Framework.
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 38:
689–711. https://doi.org/10.1006/imms.1993.1032.
öny, Matthias, Raimund Schnürer, René Sieber,
Lorenz Hurni, and Renato Pajarola. 2018.
“Storytelling in Interactive 3D Geographic
Visualization Systems.ISPRS International Journal of
Geo-Information 7 (3): 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijgi7030123.
Vujakov, Peter. 2014. “e State as a ‘Power
Container’: e Role of News Media Cartography
in Contemporary Geopolitical Discourse.e
Cartographic Journal 51 (1): 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1
179/1743277413Y.0000000043.
Wallace, Timothy R. 2016. “Cartographic Journalism:
Situating Modern News Mapping in a History of
Map-User Interaction.” PhD diss., University of
Wisconsin–Madison.
Weber Reuschel, Anne-Kathrin, Barbara Piatti, and
Lorenz Hurni. 2014. “Data-driven Expansion of
Dense Regions–A Cartographic Approach in Literary
Geography.” e Cartographic Journal 51 (2): 123-140.
https://doi.org/10.1179/1743277414Y.0000000077.
Weber, Wibke, and Hannes Rall. 2012. “Data
Visualization in Online Journalism and its Implications
for the Production Process.” Paper read at 16th
International Conference on Information Visualisation.
https://doi.org/10.1109/IV.2012.65.
Wieczorek, Anna Maria, Zuzanna Kłyszejko, Justyna
Sarzyńska, Agnieszka Szóstek, Karolina Chmiel,
Tomasz Soluch, and Aneta Brzezicka. 2014. “Mode
of Text Presentation and its Inuence on Reading
Eciency: Scrolling versus Pagination.Studia
Psychologica 56 (4): 309–321.
Young, Mary Lynn, Alfred Hermida, and Johanna Fulda.
2018. “What Makes for Great Data Journalism? A
Content Analysis of Data Journalism Awards Finalists
2012–2015.” Journalism Practice 12 (1): 115135.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1270171.